Buxley New Caches Not Being Updated ?

October 17, 2004

I need an update......is Groundspeak still hording geocache info from Buxley because he has a better mapping system? Or has Groundspeak come to their senses? :anitongue:

6.4k · October 17, 2004

I need an update......is Groundspeak still hording geocache info from Buxley because he has a better mapping system? Or has Groundspeak come to their senses?

:laughing: [edit: not worth it]

Edited October 17, 2004 by Mopar

1.2k · October 17, 2004

I need an update......is Groundspeak still hording geocache info from Buxley because he has a better mapping system? Or has Groundspeak come to their senses?

You NEED an update???? Are you going to die if you do not get one?

You are obviously a graduate of Dale Carniges "How to win Friends and Influence people"

Do you come by this ability to be rude naturally or does it take effort. Either way its a job well done if you were trying to be rude and abusive. Congrats.

BTW for the required example. "is Groundspeak still hording geocache info from Buxley because he has a better mapping system?" Your use of the word Hording implies malice that has been unproven. therefore that is rude.

"Or has Groundspeak come to their senses" Again this is Malicious because it implies that they had lost their senses by requesting that people abide by guidelines that those same people agreed to in the first place.

"Personal Attacks and Flames will not be tolerated. If you want to praise or criticize, give examples as to why it is good or bad, general attacks on a person or idea will not be tolerated.

Edited October 17, 2004 by Lapaglia

4.8k · October 18, 2004

I need an update......is Groundspeak still hording geocache info from Buxley because he has a better mapping system? Or has Groundspeak come to their senses?

You know what? I like Buxley maps and I hope that some agreement can be reached. At the same time, GC.com have every right to decide how/when their site data is harvested, if at all, and I think Elias has done a good job of keeping things updated and keeping a polite dialog going when I figure he has many other things to do. I also note that many people who have concerns have been posting in a professional and useful manner. I can only hope that people will continue to be patient and engage in useful dialog instead of petty angst.

And yes, the Pika Cacher has PMS or something and is posting out of character! :laughing:

Edit: The Pika Cacher also can't type or spell worth a darn!

Edited October 18, 2004 by carleenp

1.2k · October 18, 2004

WOW you know its bad when you upset Pika!!!!!!!!!!

24.7k · October 18, 2004

Score:

nateminy: 0

Lapaglia: -1

Mopar: 0 (but creatively saying "you are a worm not worth my time" with his edited post)

Carleenp: 1

7.2k · October 18, 2004

I've been patient, can I ask for an update? I'm pretty much more interested in the "openness" of the Groundspeak namespace in the GPS files than if Buxley's gets straightened out, though, I hope it does.

(Mainly the reason I've been patient is my project is a little further down the road before I need to make a decision which fork I'm going to take.)

Thank you for your attention.

18.9k · October 19, 2004

While nateminy might have worded his post badly and caused a bit of heartache (and Mopar weighed in with ........pre edited line here..................) the question still stands - what is up here?? Any progress? Why can't Buxley just have a big PQ once everyday with addtions and deletions? Is it a money issue? Bandwidth issue? copyright issue? or is it just a case of "does not play well with others"? (notice that I will leave it up to you to decide who....) - Bottom line - will Buxley include GC.com info (in the near future) or not?? Nearly 2 months have passed - just wondering..........????

October 19, 2004

Quit posting to this thread! Don't you know that it won't "just go away" if you keep posting here? Man, you guys make it hard for things to be swept under the rug around here. :laughing:

Seriously, if gc.com had any intention of opening this back up for Buxley's, it would have been done by now. It's not like it is rocket science or anything. I'm considering this issue dead.

R.I.P. Buxley's Maps

--RuffRidr

October 19, 2004

Hey, Buxley's maps are not dead! It's just that the proportion of gc.com caches on the maps is decreasing while the proportion of navicache.com caches is increasing. :laughing:

October 20, 2004

Rumors of the demise of Buxley's Geocaching Waypoint have been greatly exaggerated! =)

Thanks to everyone for your continued support and patience as I try to get my web site back to showing all the latest, greatest geocaches from around the world. Although new geocaches hosted by Navicache.com continue to appear on my maps, I realize that the people reading these forums want their Groundspeak caches shown as well. Me too!

I started my website way back in the Spring of 2001 when there were *maybe* a thousand caches in the world. Why? Well, I really like maps and cartography has always been something of a hobby for me. I thought putting together some maps of cache locations (there weren't any such maps at that time) would be a great way to use my skills to give something back to the geocaching community. I still believe that.

My site started out small: just a map of the San Francisco Bay Area (guess where I live?), then a map of California, then I added Nevada, and... it kind of grew from there. Little did I know that my hobby would grow to be about 1,500 maps from around the world: everywhere from Barrow at the northernmost tip of Alaska to Antarctica and most everywhere in between. It's been a lot of work and has taken several years to create my web site, but it has been very gratifying work as well. Everyone should be so lucky as to have a hobby that people find useful!

Back on September 24th I got a very nice note from one of the administrators at Groundspeak. They seemed to understand my site is a useful tool for helping geocachers get to the cache pages on their website and indicated that our discussions might lead to their providing me with direct access to the geocache location data. (Joy! Always up-to-date information -- how cool would that be?!) I responded that I was very interested in having such a discussion with them and ... well, nothing. I haven't heard from them since.

I continue to hope that, despite this short delay, we can have those discussions and I can get up-to-date data for my map pages again. And maybe even a listing on their "Useful Geocaching Links" web page again -- wouldn't that be something? =)

Cache on!

Ed Hall

Buxley's Geocaching Waypoint

http://www.brillig.com/geocaching/

2.6k · October 20, 2004

Ed, thanks for entering the discussion!

18.9k · October 20, 2004

Thanks Ed!!

1.2k · October 20, 2004

Y'know, I dunno. Just seems to me like a lovely business opportunity for Groundspeak.

Just HIRE Buxley, take advantage of what he has created and what he can do, and Groundspeak gets to have a killer tool that kicks serious patootie, and the creator's brains to back it up. Make sure only Premium members can use the new cool tool.

Then brag about this OTHER cool new thing that Premium members get when they pay up. More profit! No problem!

Just my thought du jour...

Edited October 20, 2004 by Sparrowhawk

October 20, 2004

As I see it, the unique thing about Buxley's maps is that they are not restricted to gc.com caches but he tries to include caches from other listing sites as well, thereby providing a unified, listing-site-independent map.

October 20, 2004

Ed thank you for your post.

It was good to see someone involved in this provide an update. I understand your need to be optimistic, I only hope it is not in vain. To be honest after going this long without hearing anything I would certainly have the feeling that nothing is going to happen with this. I can only base that on past history.

I never really had the need to use your site but you seem to really have provided a service that many people enjoy a great deal. Good luck to you and I hope this works out for not only you but the geocaching community as a whole.

October 21, 2004

I actually used Buxleys page quite a bit. I'd look where I was going, then I could pick a cache and venture out from there in which ever direction I felt would be best. I really hope Geocaching gets in touch with him soon. I am sure others like me that use it feel the same way. If people don't use his page, it's not going to hurt anything for him to gain access again. It looks like from the postings he puts on his web page, things were looking very optomistic, but now they have fallen through the cracks. I am sure the people at Groundspeak are very busy, so I am just hoping when they get a free monent, they will contact him.

Schnider

"When you teach people to do something in the environment, they are far more likely to do something for the environment." Paul Hindes

October 22, 2004

I have yet to see these alleged maps Groundspeak is supposed to have. Where are they?

1.3k · October 22, 2004

I have yet to see these alleged maps Groundspeak is supposed to have. Where are they?

On each and every cache page?

They've been there for months.

I'm not sure why they paid a vendor - Buxley's maps appear to be the US Census Tiger maps that are freely available although I may be wrong (I must be, it hasn't been mentioned before). I imagine they could save a lot of money by giving people what they want.

sd

October 23, 2004

Y'know, I dunno. Just seems to me like a lovely business opportunity for Groundspeak.

Just HIRE Buxley, take advantage of what he has created and what he can do, and Groundspeak gets to have a killer tool that kicks serious patootie, and the creator's brains to back it up. Make sure only Premium members can use the new cool tool.

Then brag about this OTHER cool new thing that Premium members get when they pay up. More profit! No problem!

Just my thought du jour...

Buxley's is a very important and useful part of the geocaching community and this IMHO would be a negative blow to the geocaching community. But then I never understood the pay-for-play concept anyway.

While it has taken the commercial path (which Jeremy has every right to do), it would be nice to see this worked out simply out of best interest for the sport.

2.1k · October 25, 2004

Hello,

I took a 2 week break from geocaching and the forums at the suggestion of KA, and it was lovely...I went hiking, hunting, canoeing, geodashing, letterboxing, read a stack of books, and generally divorced myself from the frustrations that had led to a 10 point spike in my warning meter.

At this point, I would like to (politely) ask for an update from TPTB on what, if anything, is happening regarding Buxley's ability to harvest information on geocaches from the geocaching.com website.

Buxley's recent post suggests that nothing has happened "discussion-wise" between gc.com and himself since September 24th (a month). It is, of course, Jeremy's option to take no action and let the gc.com geocaches on Buxley's maps sink further and further into obsolescence, but then why bother to send the 9/24 communique to Buxley at all, and why bother to tell people on this forum-thread that discussions were underway to seek a solution.

I would never assume or suggest, as some others have in previous posts, that it was merely a delaying tactic, designed to placate people until the issue of buxley's maps fell off of their radar screens; no, I choose to believe that discussions were/are really planned....and based on this belief, I see an easy fix for this misconception...

It would take a minute for TPTB to type a simple response indicating that:

1) Discussions will be actively pursued to try to come to an arrangement between Buxley and gc.com.

2) GC.com will not, at present, continue discussions to try to come to an arrangement between Buxley and gc.com.

They could even quote this message, and say simply "1" or "2".

I am sorry if this message comes on too strong, offends readers, or wastes the time of anyone involved, that is truly not my intention...I am simply interested in the outcome of this discussion which seems to have become stalled.

My sincerest thanks and gratitude are extended to all involved in this discussion for their time, patience, and understanding.

nfa - jamie

ps - in accordance with the first law of thermodynamics, no electrons were created or destroyed in the course of writing or posting this message.

Edited October 25, 2004 by NFA

24.7k · October 25, 2004

NFA, it's a perfectly good post.

2.1k · October 25, 2004

Thanks RK...

As regards some brainstorming for ways to help fix this problem...

I sent Buxley $10, not a ton, but if 100 geocachers did it, he could offer gc.com $1000 each year for the right to mine the data.

I would be willing to limit my PQing...how about 4 per day instead of 5, and only one (or none) on Wednesdays, which could be data miners' day. This would, I would think, open up some server-load-space for Buxley. I only use 2 per week, but wouldn't want to limit those heavier users too much.

Instead of continuously trolling for data, what if he updated only once per week, or once every 2 weeks?

It would also be nice to have Buxley agree to remove archived caches from his maps, and I'm sure that something could be worked out once a dialog is begun in earnest.

Again, these are just the ideas of one premium member, not anyone drawing salary at gc.com, but they could work, or at least could be talked about...

nfa - jamie

Edited October 25, 2004 by NFA

October 25, 2004

It would also be nice to have Buxley agree to remove archived caches from his maps

My understanding is that the reason why he doesn't remove them is that gc.com doesn't publish a list of archived caches for each day, so there is simply no way to learn from the web site which caches have been archived. (Unless Buxley scans each cache page every day to see if it's archived, but I don't think gc.com would be happy with this solution.) So it's not that Buxley "doesn't agree" to remove them, it's that it's technically not possible. If gc.com wants to have the archived caches removed from Buxley's maps, all they have to do is to provide a list of these caches every day.

2.1k · October 25, 2004

maybe this could be a part of their discussion and subsequent agreement...

October 25, 2004

I would be willing to limit my PQing...how about 4 per day instead of 5, and only one (or none) on Wednesdays, which could be data miners' day. This would, I would think, open up some server-load-space for Buxley.

We would be more than happy to limit our PQs to four or even three a day in favor of for example Buxley.

I only use 2 per week, but wouldn't want to limit those heavier users too much.

We're using only five per week, so tbtp could argue that there is not fewer but higher server load if we give up the right for PQs we're never using. So maybe we should use our PQs heavily so that there would be lesser load on the servers as soon as Buxley could use them ...

Greetings,

Tobias

2.1k · October 28, 2004

bump

October 28, 2004

If Parade Magazine mentions Buxley's - - do you think then we will get an answer from TPTB regarding this?

October 28, 2004

I wish either TPTB or Buxley would say something about what's going on.

2.1k · October 29, 2004

Methinks the answer lies in TPTB's blatant non-answer, but a confirmation would be nice or polite or simple common courtesy (to buxley if no-one else).

nfa-jamie

October 29, 2004

I'm gettting the uneasy feeling that TPTB are just stringing Buxley along hoping his data will be so incredibly out of date that we'll all just abandon his site and he'll just fade away.

TPTB may be busy, but not too busy to post to the forums, I've seen them!

So, what is the deal guys??

October 29, 2004

I wish either TPTB or Buxley would say something about what's going on.

Unfortunately, nothing has changed since my last posting... I still haven't heard anything from the folks at Groundspeak since their initial message to me back on September 24th.

Ed Hall

Buxley's Geocaching Waypoint

http://www.brillig.com/geocaching/

2.1k · October 30, 2004

Jeremy... :mad:

If you tell me your thoughts on the future of Buxley and gc.com, I'll tell you my thoughts on raingear and the new TB design...please

Edited October 30, 2004 by NFA

6.4k · October 30, 2004

Ya know, if this was my website, and I was working my butt off 20+ hrs a day to keep it up and running for everyone, and all anyone could do is piss and moan and expect me to drop everything to facilitate someone elses website, I probably would be to the point of saying "tough nuts, the answer is no" by now.

Actually, with the amount of people complaining they don't like the way I ran the site, I'd probably be at the point of agreeing with them and just pull the plug on the server completely, or sell out to google or something.

I'm thankful that Jeremy has got a thicker skin then I do.

6.5k · October 30, 2004

I'm thankful that Jeremy has got a thicker skin then I do.

Me too :mad:

So... Jeremy, whats the word?

October 30, 2004

Thanks for your post MOPAR. I've been stuck at home for four days with the flu and my greatest entertainment has been lurking in the forums, and I've been biting my tongue alot.

Why is this such a life and cache issue for some people, and why do some people feel they deserve a response?

Elias said he would keep you posted and he's been busy improving THIS site. When he get's a chance I'm sure you'll get a response. Quit questioning his or any of TPTB's integrity.

Sorry, time for another pill and a nap.

Edited October 30, 2004 by wvcoalcat

1.2k · October 30, 2004

Thanks for your post MOPAR. I've been stuck at home for four days with the flu and my greatest entertainment has been lurking in the forums, and I've been biting my tongue alot.

Why is this such a life and cache issue for some people, and why do some people feel they deserve a response?

Elias said he would keep you posted and he's been busy improving THIS site. When he get's a chance I'm sure you'll get a response. Quit questioning his or any of TPTB's integrity.

Sorry, time for another pill and a nap.

With thoughts like that there are a lot of people in this thread that need those pills.

Excellent response. Get well soon!

7.2k · October 30, 2004

There's a lot of people who say "if this was my site..."

October 31, 2004

Ya know, if this was my website, and I was working my butt off 20+ hrs a day to keep it up and running for everyone, and all anyone could do is piss and moan and expect me to drop everything to facilitate someone elses website, I probably would be to the point of saying "tough nuts, the answer is no" by now.
Actually, with the amount of people complaining they don't like the way I ran the site, I'd probably be at the point of agreeing with them and just pull the plug on the server completely, or sell out to google or something.

I'm thankful that Jeremy has got a thicker skin then I do.

And you are basing that 20+ hours per day on what? How do you know these things? Are TPTB telling you how many hours they are working? Please fill us in on how you know this.

As far as everyone pissing and moaning. It has been over a month since the Buxley site people have heard anything more from Groundspeak. I am guessing that at this point there really is nothing for the Groundspeak people to be doing, it is probably in the hands of attorney who should be writing up some sort of something. This does assume that Groundspeak actually moved forward on their end in anyway.

In those 20+ hours per day they are working they can't find the time to write, "Hey it is with our attorney", or "We have to sit down with our attorney and work through some details", or "Hey we are still thinking about how to best work this out", or even "Man, we have been swamped and have not had a chance to work on any of this". In the absence of any information all one can do is fill in the blanks as best they can.

The past history of this site has seen things go into the black hole that is Groundspeak so many times. Things are promised and that is the last it is heard of. Can anyone be blamed if they get the feeling that this is just another one of those times? I really have come to believe that part of TPTB's MO is to just let things go knowing for the most part they will just blow over. The people will get tired of asking, or when they do the kool-aid drinkers here will say they are being a PITA just complaining, it is not their site, TPTB have other things to do, if they don't like it they can leave, etc. How many times have we all seen this cycle?

As for selling out to Google or something, I have to ask would that be a bad thing at this point? What would be bad about it? What would be good about it? I don't know that I have the answers to those questions. But I have no doubt that plenty of other people here, who seem to know everything else, do.

And oh yea, if this was my site ... nevermind not worth it.

38.2k · October 31, 2004

a know, if this was my website, and I was working my butt off 20+ hrs a day to keep it up and running for everyone, and all anyone could do is piss and moan and expect me to drop everything to facilitate someone elses website, I probably would be to the point of saying "tough nuts, the answer is no" by now.

I don't think anybody is asking them to drop everything. It's been a long time since we've heard from GSPK on this subject . All people want is an answer. Are they going to work with Ed or not? You KNOW they're reading this thread.

I think if Jeremy came by and said either "We plan to work with Buxley to sort this out", or even "Tough nuts Buxley" it would satisfy most of the people here.

As for selling out to Google or something, I have to ask would that be a bad thing at this point? What would be bad about it?

The site would then be run by people who have no interest in geocaching, only in how much money they can squeeze out it. As it is now at least the site is run by geocachers who, though they are happy to make money doing this, they usually have the best interests of the sport in mind when making decisions.

Edited October 31, 2004 by briansnat

October 31, 2004

The site would then be run by people who have no interest in geocaching, only in how much money they can squeeze out it. As it is now at least the site is run by geocachers who, though they are happy to make money doing this, they usually have the best interests of the sport in mind when making decisions.

Hmmm... is that a fact?

7.2k · October 31, 2004

Personally, I really think geocaching is not a viable money making avenue for most companies.

About the only company I can think of that could offer listing geocaches and make any money is Yahoo! They have a very diverse set of content with all of their games, boards, groups, and whatnot. That's not to mention they have the deep pockets and infrastructure to make it happen. They could integrate geocache listing quite easily.

I don't see an advantage to Google to pick up geocaching. Their main focus seems to be searches and data retrieval. I don't see the volume being there for it to be worth their time.

I personally don't see geocaching hitting a volume to be more than a hobby-gone-pro for a small business. If there would be any money in it another site would have popped up and had the funding to do promotions to suck caches away from gc.com. That there hasn't been is very telling.

While I don't know how much stock one can put into the rankings on Alexa considering it only counts Alexa toolbar users, they indicate that geocaching.com has not been having the growth one would think by reading the forums. Alexa indicates a peak in the middle of last year and a somewhat steady decline. Of course, this could be from an increase of PQ users or other factors. Who knows?

The point is, I don't see there are many opportunities for Jeremy to sell out even if he wanted to.

21.9k · October 31, 2004

And you are basing that 20+ hours per day on what? How do you know these things? Are TPTB telling you how many hours they are working? Please fill us in on how you know this.

I'm guessing that Mopar, like the rest of the community at large, reads things like the downtime announcements for maintenance upgrades ("Beginning this evening at 10:00 p.m., Pacific Time...) or Jeremy's forum posts at all hours of the night saying "Thanks, I fixed that bug." It's pretty obvious that they're working hard over the past couple of months toward the primary goal of making the website perform better instead of choking regularly on the weekends. If it were my website I would concentrate on that before concentrating on someone else's website. In fact, the throttling was one of the tools introduced to help the site performance.

As for selling out to Google or something, I have to ask would that be a bad thing at this point? What would be bad about it? What would be good about it? I don't know that I have the answers to those questions. But I have no doubt that plenty of other people here, who seem to know everything else, do.

From my perspective as a volunteer for this website, I may not know "everything" but I can give my opinion on why a sellout would be a bad thing. There are about 50 volunteers who each willingly donate an average of 20 hours per week to help keep this website running smoothly: reviewing and listing new caches, answering geocachers' questions, helping with cache adoption and cache maintenance issues, dealing with land managers and moderating these forums, just to name a few of these many tasks. We do this because the site owners are geocachers too and we feel it's a worthy effort to support. I would guess that all or nearly all of us would resign if the site were sold to a large company. Why volunteer our time for Disney or Google? You now have a vacuum. Either the site has no listing standards, drastically reduced customer service and unmoderated forums, or these services continue with paid employees. Initially I'd bet that this would be attempted with $5 per hour employees, but I daresay that you would not attract anything near the current collection of lawyers, computer programmers, customer service specialists and other professionals who donate their time here and know the area they're responsible for serving. So let's say it takes $10 per hour to get people of that calibre.

50 volunteers x 20 hours/week x $10 x 52 weeks per year = $520,000 in wages, exclusive of benefits, social security, etc. The cost of a premium membership goes up just a bit.

October 31, 2004

Instead of having a few run the system or selling out to someone like Google/Yahoo, why not go the other way and allow each State/Country/Province setup sites that hosts their data?

If there are already local approvers/etc all around, then they continue to work as before.

GPX/Loc data format is already standardized, so each site could give access to their data and let anyone format it the way they wanted.

Of course there would be issues in going there, but once there, the benefits would be great. Most cachers cache in their state thus they would be hitting their system the most.

If it seems slow, they can upgrade, benefiting them the most.

Geocaching.com could still generate pages from the state databases and continue for those who like/want how they present the data.

I know...easier said than done.

Kenneth

24.7k · October 31, 2004

Instead of having a few run the system or selling out to someone like Google/Yahoo, why not go the other way and allow each State/Country/Province setup sites that hosts their data?
If there are already local approvers/etc all around, then they continue to work as before.

GPX/Loc data format is already standardized, so each site could give access to their data and let anyone format it the way they wanted.

Of course there would be issues in going there, but once there, the benefits would be great. Most cachers cache in their state thus they would be hitting their system the most.

If it seems slow, they can upgrade, benefiting them the most.

Geocaching.com could still generate pages from the state databases and continue for those who like/want how they present the data.

I know...easier said than done.

Kenneth

That's essentially the Opencaching model of geocache listings. As of now the USA effort has stalled due to real life getting in the way though they do have a prototype database and have not given up the project. The German effort is doing much better and has made a lot more progress. I'm unsure about where they are at in relation to the point at which they go live.

Under opencaching Buxleys would have no problem updating his maps. Navicache uses essentially the same model as GC.com and also causes no issues with Buxleys. GC.com's issue isn't the listing model it's data protection. What comes out of the GC.com attorney's will likely impact all the regional stats sites as well as Buxleys.

It's no small step for Groundspeak.

For my money I have every right to make my desires known. Just like I can with any other private company. The ones who like having customers even listen and do the best they can to accommodate their desires. People like CO Admin can tell everyone to pop chill pills but his message is essentially "Shut the hell up". Hopefully a few chill pills slip in his drink while he's passing them out. Groundspeak can ignore everyone here. It's their choice. Their choice impacts what we paying members do. It's flat out silly that the debate in this thread now is over whether or not it's ok to ask about the status of something everyone is interested it.

Here is a news flash for some. Yes it is.

Edited October 31, 2004 by Renegade Knight

2.1k · October 31, 2004

Please...

Can someone from TPTB comment decisively on the future (or even the present) of gc.com and Buxley's.

As has been pointed out, it would/will be a simple matter for TPTB to say that:

YES, we are engaged in negotiations to reinstate Buxley's access to gc.com date in some form
NO, we have no interest or plans in reinstating Buxley's access to gc.com data
some other answer explaining the lengthy silence and negotiational inactivity (as reported by Buxley)

Given the serious nature of this thread I have to question the relevance to this discussion of the following recent meanderings:

how well/poorly google would do as owner of gc.com
whether or not Jeremy and other gc.com staff along with KA and the other volunteers are hard-working (let's stipulate that they are, without having seen their timecards, I certainly laud their efforts on behalf of gc.com and geocaching)
what Mopar would do if gc.com was his
the thickness of Mopar's organs/body parts as opposed to Jeremy's
what effect flu-pills would have on people griping about gc.com
IF it's OK to ask questions of TPTB

Jeremy...any thoughts...really, either way, an answer would be widely appreciated...it is your shop, so if you decide to deny Buxley access (as you certainly have the right to do), then just confirm it and we can all move on to something else.

I am sorry if this message comes on too strong, offends readers, or wastes the time of anyone involved, that is truly not my intention...I am simply interested in the outcome of this discussion which seems to have become stalled.

My sincerest thanks and gratitude are extended to all involved in this discussion for their time, patience, and understanding.

nfa - jamie

ps - in accordance with the first law of thermodynamics, no electrons were created or destroyed in the course of writing or posting this message.

Edited October 31, 2004 by NFA

October 31, 2004

NFA stated:
Given the serious nature of this thread I have to question the relevance to this discussion of the following recent meanderings:

* how well/poorly google would do as owner of gc.com

* whether or not Jeremy and other gc.com staff along with KA and the other volunteers are hard-working (let's stipulate that they are, without having seen their timecards, I certainly laud their efforts on behalf of gc.com and geocaching)

* what Mopar would do if gc.com was his

* the thickness of Mopar's organs/body parts as opposed to Jeremy's

* what effect flu-pills would have on people griping about gc.com

* IF it's OK to ask questions of TPTB

You can "question the relevance" since maybe you have trouble reading between the lines.

Let me make it simpler if you are having trouble with the "relevance".

The matter at hand is that people want to know if a resource they accessed before will be there in the future. They might have gotten to the resource via proxy though Buxley's, but ultimately they want an answer, yes or no.

To my point....since no one is answering, they are theorizing alternatives so they feel they will know. If they can come up with an answer, then they want to help.

Some are accusations of lack of effort on the admins part.

These are things people do when they are ignored.

Also, I think people are getting frustrated as they feel there is a pattern of ignoring them.

Hope this helps.

Kenneth

October 31, 2004

That's essentially the Opencaching model of geocache listings. As of now the USA effort has stalled due to real life getting in the way though they do have a prototype database and have not given up the project. The German effort is doing much better and has made a lot more progress. I'm unsure about where they are at in relation to the point at which they go live.

Under opencaching Buxleys would have no problem updating his maps. Navicache uses essentially the same model as GC.com and also causes no issues with Buxleys. GC.com's issue isn't the listing model it's data protection. What comes out of the GC.com attorney's will likely impact all the regional stats sites as well as Buxleys.

I would liken our model more to that of geocaching.de than here, especially since we promote/support the opencaching model and database sharing as well as continue to feed Buxley's.

Edited October 31, 2004 by PC Medic

2.3k · October 31, 2004

Chill Pill???

Edited October 31, 2004 by CO Admin

1.4k · November 1, 2004

I was kinda hoping that some more progress would have been made by now on this situation as it would allow local/regional geocaching groups the ability to access the data in question and customize it for use on our local/regional web sites.

Buxley New Caches Not Being Updated ?

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