Squeezing Your Peeps

March 27, 2004

I just wanted to drop a note and say what an inconvience it is that the powers that be droped the watch list from 100 to 50 if you have a regular membership. I host a number of websites and know how important premium memberships are and I have no problem with offering extra services for such a membership but it is bad business and poor form to cut back on existing services (That folks are already using) in an effort to force folks to upgrade.

Thanks for the great site otherwise

Edited March 27, 2004 by OrthoGuy

March 27, 2004

especially when they don't tell you!

3.1k · March 27, 2004

I hadn't noticed that it was reduced. Since I only watch a handful of caches at a time it wasn't a factor.

9.5k · March 27, 2004

I just wanted to drop a note and say what an inconvience it is that the powers that be droped the watch list from 100 to 50 if you have a regular membership. I host a number of websites and know how important premium memberships are and I have no problem with offering extra services for such a membership but it is bad business and poor form to cut back on existing services (That folks are already using) in an effort to force folks to upgrade.

Thanks

Then you probably know how expensive it gets when the ratio of non-paying members are higher than the paying members and the non-paying members take advantage of the services without doing much to support the site. It's a matter of economics.

Either that, or hardly anybody was using the full 100 to begin with so why not free up the resources for something else? Of course... being a host of several websites you would have considered that too... right?

The way I look at it, if it's being provided for free to me, I won't complain if they limit it down. If I'm paying for the same and then they limit it down, then I feel I would have room to complain.

So... which side of the fence are you on again?

7.2k · March 27, 2004

It's not as if the 50 unused slots on the watch list was taking up space.

6.4k · March 27, 2004

I just wanted to drop a note and say what an inconvience it is that the powers that be droped the watch list from 100 to 50 if you have a regular membership. I host a number of websites and know how important premium memberships are and I have no problem with offering extra services for such a membership but it is bad business and poor form to cut back on existing services (That folks are already using) in an effort to force folks to upgrade.

Thanks for the great site otherwise

Top of the line Maggy GPS to find caches? Check.

Toyota Land Cruiser for getting to caches? Check.

181 finds and 10 hides over the last 2 years? Check.

3 pages of photos from those caches hosted? Check.

Spending $30 a year to keep the website running that facilitates all that?

Send a check!

Maybe some peeps need a little squeeze to remind them how much it costs to keep a webite like this up, and how little they ask for.

March 27, 2004

According to Salary.com the average salary for a chiropractor/orthospinologist living in Murphy, NC is a little over $68K. I'm guessing the $30 would be a real hardship..

2.2k · March 27, 2004

Jusy go caching and be happy.

1.3k · March 27, 2004

Wow. I thought the non-paid watch list was 5 caches, not 50.

I'm honestly amazed it's that high. People should be grateful they're not suffering under my iron fist.

Then again, I'm amazed anyone is watching 50 caches.

3.1k · March 27, 2004

Guys it's ok not to be a member. It's ok to lodge a complaint about changes made to the site that affect non members. He didn't make it a personal attack, he just complained. That doesn't make him anti GC.com or anti Jeremy.

He only complained that the reduction was unannounced and he felt that this made it a poor business decision. He has been a member for 2 years and hidden 10 caches so in his own fashion he has contributed already.

9.2k · March 27, 2004

Wow. I thought the non-paid watch list was 5 caches, not 50.

I'm honestly amazed it's that high. People should be grateful they're not suffering under my iron fist.

Then again, I'm amazed anyone is watching 50 caches.

I've got over 200 in mine. Why would that be amazing?

9.5k · March 27, 2004

Guys it's ok not to be a member. It's ok to lodge a complaint about changes made to the site that affect non members. He didn't make it a personal attack, he just complained. That doesn't make him anti GC.com or anti Jeremy.

He only complained that the reduction was unannounced and he felt that this made it a poor business decision. He has been a member for 2 years and hidden 10 caches so in his own fashion he has contributed already.

I actually caught that before replying but it is a point well worth being taken.

CoyoteRed Posted on Mar 27 2004, 03:25 AM
It's not as if the 50 unused slots on the watch list was taking up space.

A common misconception is that disk space is the only resource that needs to be concerned about. To hold that many in reserve also takes memory which individually doesn't amount to much, but now hold that up for even half the members that have joined and you can see where you can make the server a little more efficient by cutting the amount in half.

Frankly, I'm with Bons and recall that recently the limit was only 5. So hearing that it was 100 (without announcement) and then cut back to 50 still puts me in the plus. I just don't see where there's room to complain in the face of that tenfold increase.

Edited March 27, 2004 by TotemLake

6.5k · March 27, 2004

Frankly, I'm with Bons and recall that recently the limit was only 5. So hearing that it was 100 (without announcement) and then cut back to 50 still puts me in the plus. I just don't see where there's room to complain in the face of that tenfold increase.

Only 5!?

That wouldn't be very helpful IMO

btw-when was this all changed??

2k · March 27, 2004

I think the watch list limit had been 100 at least since Fall of 2002 (when I started caching.)

(And I'll admit I was finally pushed into paying when I got near 100 items).

Do we know that the reduction to 50 was intentional? (Since I'm paid, I'm not sure I could tell...just curious).

4k · March 27, 2004

Guys it's ok not to be a member. It's ok to lodge a complaint about changes made to the site that affect non members. He didn't make it a personal attack, he just complained. That doesn't make him anti GC.com or anti Jeremy.

He only complained that the reduction was unannounced and he felt that this made it a poor business decision. He has been a member for 2 years and hidden 10 caches so in his own fashion he has contributed already.

I agree. I've been trying to cough up the membership fee, but different things keep coming up. I had 56 caches on my watchlist. Yesterday, I found 4 more and was trying to add them....and WHAM!!!!! Denied. For those of you with umpteen million finds, this may not seem big, but for my measly 63 finds, I like to see who finds caches after me. I think the fact that it was thrown upon us without mention was bad, but I ain't gonna complain.....too much.

When I first started geocaching, I said I'd never pay to play....well, that's all gone out the window. I will eventually get my check sent in, but not so I can play....so that I can give back something to the rest of the community in terms of what my extra $30 will make available to everyone, not just members. I appreciate those that have paid their memberships all this time so that I can come here and play and enjoy the site as it is. Now, I want to make that option available to any noobs that may not want to cough up the money until they decide whether or not geocaching is for them.

March 27, 2004

He only complained that the reduction was unannounced and he felt that this made it a poor business decision.

Limiting the extent to which users enjoy free access to/usage of resources that cost money to acquire, operate and maintain can only be considered a reasonable and sound business decision. Such decisions may prove to be unpopular among those users who are not paying members, but that does not make them bad decisions.

Should the change mentioned in this thread have been announced in advance? No, probably not ... I suspect TPTB took the time to estimate the number of new paid memberships that would be gained and weighed it against the number of forum threads/posts made in protest of the decision that would have made the change more difficult to implement.

March 27, 2004

Limiting the extent to which users enjoy free access to/usage of resources that cost money to acquire, operate and maintain can only be considered a reasonable and sound business decision. Such decisions may prove to be unpopular among those users who are not paying members, but that does not make them bad decisions.

About a year ago I was planning to become a paying member. Then Jeremy started making some of his inconvenient and unannounced changes to the website. These annoyed me enough so that now I won't even consider paying. The drop from 100 to 50 caches on the watchlist is just one more example.

I don't think it's a reasonable and sound business decision when you drive away potential customers.

4k · March 27, 2004

Limiting the extent to which users enjoy free access to/usage of resources that cost money to acquire, operate and maintain can only be considered a reasonable and sound business decision. Such decisions may prove to be unpopular among those users who are not paying members, but that does not make them bad decisions.

About a year ago I was planning to become a paying member. Then Jeremy started making some of his inconvenient and unannounced changes to the website. These annoyed me enough so that now I won't even consider paying. The drop from 100 to 50 caches on the watchlist is just one more example.

I don't think it's a reasonable and sound business decision when you drive away potential customers.

I agree, it should have been announced, but when it gets right down to it, I personally think the ability to use this site without paying in itsself is a good enough reason to pay and support it.....

1.1k · March 27, 2004

Squeezing Your Peeps

The Surgeon General has determined that "Squeezing Your Peeps" may result in loss of eye sight, hairy palms and low sperm count. On a personal note, are you caching in my area? :rolleyes:

5.3k · March 28, 2004

??? Edited March 28, 2004 by Stunod

9.5k · March 28, 2004

I think the watch list limit had been 100 at least since Fall of 2002 (when I started caching.)

(And I'll admit I was finally pushed into paying when I got near 100 items).

Do we know that the reduction to 50 was intentional? (Since I'm paid, I'm not sure I could tell...just curious).

I've only been on for a year, but I routinely hit the 5 limit and as recently as last month. So, if there was a 100 limit, then it wasn't for everybody. Perhaps TPTB evened it up for all to enjoy.

4k · March 28, 2004

I think the watch list limit had been 100 at least since Fall of 2002 (when I started caching.)

(And I'll admit I was finally pushed into paying when I got near 100 items).

Do we know that the reduction to 50 was intentional? (Since I'm paid, I'm not sure I could tell...just curious).

I've only been on for a year, but I routinely hit the 5 limit and as recently as last month. So, if there was a 100 limit, then it wasn't for everybody. Perhaps TPTB evened it up for all to enjoy.

That's news to me (about the limit of 5). I've been here only since November of last year, and it's always been 100 for me. I guess I shouldn't worry too much about it, as I hope to get my account upgraded soon. To be honest, I never thought I'd get anywhere near the 100 limit, much less the 50 limit it's at now! :rolleyes:

9.2k · March 28, 2004

In the 3 years I've been using geocaching.com, I don't recall the watchlist limit ever being 5. That's would be pretty useless.

2.2k · March 28, 2004

I dont think Ill ever have more than 10 caches on my watchlist. If it makes him happy, let him have my other 90.

9.4k · March 28, 2004

Sorry, I've been in class all weekend and haven't had a chance to respond to this one. Wish me luck on my motorcycle test tomorrow afternoon.

When moving to the new codebase, I failed to check on the previous exact watchlist limit for non-premium members, and assumed it was 50, so coded that in that way when updating the new watchlist page. As I personally have maybe 10 or so on my own list I guess I just assumed that 50 was an incredibly large number for most people to watch. Considering the volume of emails that 50 caches could potentially create, someone would really have to be into geocaching and, reasonably, would be interested in supporting the web site. Ergo, the shift from the apparent previous limit 100 to 50.

You certainly give me too much credit. In no way was this an attempt to "squeeze the peeps" as the number of users this change would affect is pathetically low, unlike, say, showing a few porn shots to get you to cough up some money to see the final spread. So any financial benefit I would achieve from such a move would also be pathetically low. Besides, if you want to get around it (as we had one user say in the past), you could create a second account and watch another 50, and so on, and so on. The cool part is you could go on saying that there is nothing that the site can offer you, so why bother obtaining a premium membership in the first place.

I am usually forthcoming about changes to the site, so keep monitoring these forums as I post a message whenever a new change or feature is implemented. I am, sadly, human, and occasionally I make a mistake or change that adversely affects a small group of individuals who use a feature that in some cases I didn't even know existed. This site does a lot of stuff, some of which I coded over 2 years ago, so try giving me the benefit of the doubt once in a while.

As for changing back the 100 watchlist items to 50, is there really a huge number of people watching so many caches?

9.4k · March 28, 2004

I've only been on for a year, but I routinely hit the 5 limit and as recently as last month.

There has never been a 5 watchlist limit. Not sure where you were getting this error.

4k · March 28, 2004

As I stated before, I watch all the caches I've found, which to date would have all been included in the 100 cache limit. Also, as I stated, I'm still trying to get the money together to make my membership legit.....but, life keeps getting in my way. Having to buy a new top for my Jeep after a run-in with a Mack truck last weekend is only the latest in a string of financially derailing incidents. So, once I do get all my frogs in a row, I won't have to worry about the limit on the watch list.

Oh, and good luck on your test! Please, always wear a helmet. As a paramedic, we called helmetless riders organ donors. Don't become one, please!

9.4k · March 28, 2004

These annoyed me enough so that now I won't even consider paying. The drop from 100 to 50 caches on the watchlist is just one more example.

I don't think it's a reasonable and sound business decision when you drive away potential customers.

You've logged more caches than I have on this web site. Does this make you a customer or a potential customer?

2.2k · March 28, 2004

I am, sadly, human, and occasionally I make a mistake.....

Your HUMAN??? :rolleyes:

Ive always thought of you as the all powerful geocaching god. I guess Ill have to go dis-assemble my Jeremy altar. :lol:

2.7k · March 28, 2004

showing a few porn shots to get you to cough up some money to see the final spread.

Signal porn? Is that even legal? :rolleyes:

4k · March 28, 2004

showing a few porn shots to get you to cough up some money to see the final spread.

Signal porn? Is that even legal?

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :rolleyes:

March 28, 2004

Good luck on your motorcycle license test!!! :rolleyes: Fifty caches on my watchlist would be plenty even if I wasn't a premium member. It amazes me that someone would even complain about this when they are getting so much for free. :lol:

9.4k · March 28, 2004

Well, it is a motorcycle safety course, so of course I have a helmet. Full face, thanks for asking.

I actually already have my endorsement, but I felt after 2 years of riding it was about time I learned how to ride. Sounds counterintuitive, but it's not.

2.7k · March 28, 2004

Well be safe. I decided after my first day on a motorcycle and getting into an accident (thank Mrs. Soccer Mom and your SUV) that perhaps I'd better just stick to my car with teh windows down.

Good luck, seriously, and drive safe!

9.5k · March 28, 2004

I've only been on for a year, but I routinely hit the 5 limit and as recently as last month.

There has never been a 5 watchlist limit. Not sure where you were getting this error.

I'm not sure either nor was I complaining. I did hit a few times and figured it was just par for being a non-paying member. Whatever you did fixed me to my benefit so thanks!

9.5k · March 28, 2004

Well, it is a motorcycle safety course, so of course I have a helmet. Full face, thanks for asking.

I actually already have my endorsement, but I felt after 2 years of riding it was about time I learned how to ride. Sounds counterintuitive, but it's not.

I know what you mean. I learned a lot when I took the course. Dang I miss my bike. One of these days maybe....

March 28, 2004

Sorry, I've been in class all weekend and haven't had a chance to respond to this one. Wish me luck on my motorcycle test tomorrow afternoon.

Good decision to take the motocycle test, Jeremy. I recommend it to anyone thinking of riding (either starting or just getting back to it). Belated good luck.

By the way, how'd you do?

Edited March 28, 2004 by harleycache

6.4k · March 28, 2004

Well, it is a motorcycle safety course, so of course I have a helmet. Full face, thanks for asking.

I actually already have my endorsement, but I felt after 2 years of riding it was about time I learned how to ride. Sounds counterintuitive, but it's not.

Good luck, J!

That full face helmet saved my life in an accident. Well, even if i had lived, I'm not sure I would have wanted to, as I shattered the chin protector. Came out of it with a shattered shoulder and a chipped vertebrae, but it could have been SO much worse. I can't believe people ride without a helmet.

3.1k · March 28, 2004

Aaah the thread has been hyjacked to motorcycles and helmets. :lol:

Good

When I raced bikes I always wore a full face top of the line helmet and I can assure you it saved my gray matter (some of it) more than once. Now I just tour and I use an open face. I'm ugly and who cares.

But on the rare occassion I'm in a state that doesn't force you to wear a helmet I will not wear one every so often. Usually it's when I'm tooling around city streets at residential speeds. Can I get injured? Certainly but it's my choice and I embrace it and take responsibility for it.

Do you know what injury most automobile drivers are killed by? Head injuries. Think we should force helmets on those drivers?? :rolleyes:

Motorcyclists usually aren't killed by a head injury. It's usually death by compaction.

Enjoy your safety class Jeremy :lol:

March 28, 2004

J:

As a web developer I just have to sound off in your defense. This website is extremely well designed and the functions of the site are very well thought out. I personally think you provide too much to the non-members. Everytime I get a server load error this feeling gets much more intense. People that are not paying a membership fee really don't have much ground to stand on when complaining. (you get what you pay for!)

I would love to see some basic statistics on paying vs non-paying numbers. Of course like Mopar I would also like to see more draconian limits on what non-paying members can do. I would really like to see them limited in things that need large database transations so that us paying members didn't get server application errors as often.

I really love the non-members that splurge for that new feature laden GPS but can't seem to send in $30 to the site that makes it possible for them to have something to look for. (if you don't fit this example, then ignore that comment -- don't send me hate mail) :rolleyes:

-=End of Rant=-

March 28, 2004

One more thought:

What can us paying members do to help?

Member Only Caches

1.3k · March 28, 2004

I disagree with the members only cache bit.

I want caching to be as free as possible. I want people who can beg, borrow, or buy a GPS to be able to find one of my caches.

But there are a lot of "geocaching luxuries" on the website. Watchlist, Pocket Queries, Geocaching Maps, and e-mail notifications are luxuries. You don't need them to go caching.

Building them and making them available as a "thank you" for those people who chip in and help make this website accessable to everyone strikes me as a nice thing to do. Complaining about a loss in luxury when you're not willing to chip in strikes me as not a nice thing to do.

Keeping someone from finding or logging a cache just because they're having a hard times making ends me doesn't strike me as a nice thing either.

3.3k · March 28, 2004

I can't believe people ride without a helmet.

I can't believe it's not illegal to?

Edited March 28, 2004 by Stuey

March 28, 2004

I can't believe people ride without a helmet.

I can't believe it's not illegal to?

I live in Florida, it is not illegal to ride without helmets, if you have the proper amt of insurance. Of course, the proper amount isn't enough to take care of you, if...

But, I frequently ride without one. It is my choice, I choose to accept it. I don't drive in a car without wearing seatbelts, but do ride without a helmet. I also disagree with a law mandating the use of seatbelts. I just think as an adult I should be able to make the choice.

quoting: Lazyboy & Mitey Mite

"Can I get injured? Certainly but it's my choice and I embrace it and take responsibility for it.

Do you know what injury most automobile drivers are killed by? Head injuries. Think we should force helmets on those drivers??

Motorcyclists usually aren't killed by a head injury. It's usually death by compaction. " And helmets don't stop that.

:rolleyes:

3.3k · March 28, 2004

(edit: oops, way off topic)

Edited March 28, 2004 by Stuey

2.3k · March 28, 2004

I had 56 caches on my watchlist. Yesterday, I found 4 more and was trying to add them....and WHAM!!!!! Denied. For those of you with umpteen million finds, this may not seem big, but for my measly 63 finds, I like to see who finds caches after me.

If this is all you need the watch list for, you could do this: go to your cache page and click on your stat/view my profile link then click on user stats tab. You can then look thru all your finds, by type, and see what ones have been found recently. On the very right of that page the most recent find is in black and the date of your find is in green.

I like to do the same thing and I am a premium member and that's still the way I like to do it.

It does take a little longer of course, but I don't really need all the extra email that I would get from having all of my finds on a watch list, and I don't really have a lot of finds yet (under 200).

Hope this may help.

Edit: Oops. You can also do this on the 'Hide & Seek A Cache' tab on the main screen by entering your user name in the 'search by user name' field. This search does not sort by type but is in the order of most recent finds 1st.

Edited March 28, 2004 by Corp Of Discovery

March 28, 2004

Well you guys did it, made me feel guilty about not being a premium so I went and joined up.

Feel better already.

Tom

4k · March 28, 2004

But, I frequently ride without one. It is my choice, I choose to accept it. I don't drive in a car without wearing seatbelts, but do ride without a helmet. I also disagree with a law mandating the use of seatbelts. I just think as an adult I should be able to make the choice.

That's nice....so the rest of us get to pay for your lack of responsibility through higher insurance premiums and higher health-care bills. :rolleyes:

1.1k · March 28, 2004

Usually it's when I'm tooling around city streets at residential speeds. Can I get injured? Certainly but it's my choice and I embrace it and take responsibility for it.

I am not about to attempt to inform someone about what they should or shouldn't do. You are right It IS your choice, 110%. I will defend your right to make that choice, regardless of my personnal feelings

Now, I told you that story so I could tell you this one. 80% of motorcycle fatalities occur under 25 mph. Be careful and ride safe.

1.6k · March 28, 2004

Well you guys did it, made me feel guilty about not being a premium so I went and joined up.
Feel better already.

Tom

Bah! I have to wait till May the 1st till I can pay up! :rolleyes:

:lol:

MarcB

Squeezing Your Peeps

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

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