Members Only Caches

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

CoyoteRed said: Question: Do you hunt these "slackers'" caches? If so, and considering you appear to have very little regard for them, why? Did they not contribute to your find count?

Sure I do, and have fun doing it. There is no slacker in my caching area that has more non MOC caches than I do so they get to find more of mine than I can of theirs.

You state I had little regard for them, Do you just make this stuff up CR as you go along because you have very little regard for this site even though you tried to start your own and it was a flop. Everyone else can see why yours was a flop by the way you try to do the point counter point kind of thing your are famous for and change what others are saying and trying to stack the deck in your side. It ain’t working bud, flop onnnnnnn and sure you will have a catchy reply

Back off and take a look at your self the great whiner and slacker, funny but they fit you well. ………………… JOE

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

...Back off and take a look at your self the great whiner and slacker, funny but they fit you well. ………………… JOE

Do you save this stuff up for the forums? How does it strengthen your position on MOC caches? You would of been better served by pointing out that you have given out the coordinates on your MOC caches to non members.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Sure, I've got a reply. Don't know how "catchy" it is, though.

But I have to ask, Jo, is the monkey standing over your shoulder telling what to write? You two sound so much alike.

Yep, I said that you appear to have little regard for those who aren't paying members. I infer that from your use of the term "slacker." I certainly don't take your use as an endearing term. So, where am I making up stuff?

What site are you talking about, BTW? For your information, opencaching.com is not my site. I'm an advocate, but it is no where near being mine. Might want to go research your facts before you put your other foot in your mouth.

I will grant you one thing, I could loosely be called a "whiner" as I do have complaits from time to time, but "slacker?" Where did you get that one?

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

I am a premium member myself but I still respect non-paying members and consider them equal members of the community. They are the ones who place the majority of the caches and contribute the majority of the logs. Why they don't buy a premium membership is none of my business.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

This sooooooo Cool am having thirty bucks worth of fun in this thread alone……… JOE

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Edited October 12, 2004 by CoyoteRed

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Hopefully, when the new "buddy lists" come out there will be a way to secure a listing in a different manner.

Hopefully the "buddy lists" will be feature for Premium Members only. :blink:

That way, in addition to being a useful feature, it will provide even more useful and entertaining threads like this! :lol: :blink: :unsure: :blink:

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Great. Yet another way to divide the masses.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Why don't we hide some caches that are for non-premium members only?

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Why don't we hide some caches that are for non-premium members only?

NMOC? Now yer thinkin I can see it now "gc.com's first 'Non-Members' Only Cache. Please note if you're a premium member and you log a find on this cache it will be deleted by the cache owner." :unsure: :blink:

Thorin

Edited October 12, 2004 by thorin

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Why don't we hide some caches that are for non-premium members only?

Well, you can. According to a famous phrase here in forums, it's your cache, it's your rules. So go ahead and make that rule valid on your 'for non-premium members only' cache and delete every find from premium members. :blink:

Edit: Oh well, thorin beat me to it.

Edited October 12, 2004 by Divine

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

But I have to ask, Jo, is the monkey standing over your shoulder telling what to write? You two sound so much alike.

You have said several insulting things, but to compare my written statements to Joe's, well that just about takes the cake.

Perhaps you meant that although we use a different vocabulary and rules of grammar, neither of us have any problem calling a spade a spade.

Has this topic been well and truly beaten to death yet? Every month we have a new firestorm of how anyone who uses a feature they choose to pay for is bad or elitist. The same folks come in and explain why they choose to do it, the same folks come in and explain why that makes them bad people, the same people straddle the fence and say they understand why but that they would never do it. This is a divisive topic that after so many discussions I think we can all see that there will be no agreement on, beyond that we could "agree to disagree".

This is exactly the type of topic that people should point to when they ask, "What is wrong with the forums". I believe strongly in the power of discussion and that it is important to try to work things out, but this is one of the topics where that has not proven possible. Honestly, at least once a month this comes up and when was the last time we really heard something new? It is just an excuse for the same groups of people to rehash last month's arguments so they can get off on seeing their "opinions" in print. Maybe this time someone will leave themselves open and you can hit them with a very clever zinger, maybe not, is it really worth working for?

In the great scheme of things in this sport this issue means almost nothing. MOC's exist, some people like them, some people don't, many people could care less. This topic is a non-starter, there is no happy medium, there is no way to solve this without upsetting one side or the other, since there is no room for compromise. So why bother having the discussion? All that is going to happen is lots of people are going to say noncommittal things, a few people are going to come down solidly on one side or the other, Joe is going to call someone a slacker, and CR is going to get his panties in a wad. I have the answer.

For our November discussion of the evils of MOC's, I will start a thread that says MOC's exist. Joe may respond that he thinks non-paying members are slackers, CR may take up to 3000 lines of text to say that he does not like geocaching.com and therefore will not pay them and that no one else should, but that he still wants every cache to be available to him. I will refrain from posting and starting a new discussion of why he is on the GC.com forums if he dislikes Groundspeak so much, I will instead wait until five people have responded with something noncommittal, as the OP I will then close the thread until December when we can do it all again. With a little practice we can get it all where we just copy-paste it together and on the first of every month we can get this moot discussion out of the way in a couple of hours, then move on to things that matter or that might be helpful to someone.

I think it can work. All kidding aside, maybe we should all work harder to make these forums a better place, somewhere that people feel good about coming to. The constant rehashing of old topics that we all know are going to cause a fight at some point, are really turning the forums into a playground for the few instead of an open forum for all geocachers. We need to remember that new folks look in here everyday, see the angst and go running, how are we going to build a real community based on that.

I am Monkeybrad, and I approve this message.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Can't argue with that!

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

I think one way to make the forum friendlier is not to kill every discussion by insisting that the topic has been beaten to death a dozen times earlier so there's no point in talking about it.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

I invite you to add something new to this discussion, something that was not said last month or the month before that. If you have something to add to the discussion I am sure that we would all like to hear it, perhaps you have the key to solving this once and for all. If not, then you prove my point rather well. Thank you.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

And so what? We can have a similar discussion again, even if most of the arguments are the same, different people may participate. I don't think it's a realistic expectation that everyone who raises a subject should read all the two dozen previous discussions about it and decide that it's not worth talking about it any more. We might as well close the entire forum with that attitude.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

. . . . perhaps you have the key to solving this once and for all.

I have an idea - for everyone with opinions on either side of this issue:

Get Over It

Its only a game. Play your game, allow others to play thiers. Dont like thier way?

Too Bad - Its thier game to play thier way - just as its Your game, to play Your way.

We all have the right to participate however we want to - whether You agree or not.

Its not Your problem or concern, so let others have thier fun - and have Your fun.

It really shouldnt matter to any of us how or why others particiapte in any way they can or do. So what?

Get Over It

Just my .02

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

We might as well close the entire forum

I second the motion.

All in favor?

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Get Over It

I second the motion.

All in favor?

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

I agree.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

This MOC discussion is at the very least, humorous. I still don't understand why non-members feel threatened by the premium status. The premium status is available to everyone regardless of skill level, geographics, and economic level. The 'I can't afford it right now' arguement is ridiculous. There is the option of paying $3 a month. I know of unemployeed people who spend more than $3 per day on cigarettes, beer and junk food. I feel there is $30 worth of value in being a premium member. Heck, I don't even use the paperless features available to me and I still believe there is $30 worth of value in being a premium member. If you don't see the value, then stop crying, grow-up, shut-up and get on with your life. So, in summary, either put up or go whine to someone who cares.

Affectionately yours,

PS- I'm having a dreadful day at work, can't you tell ... hehehe.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Why don't we hide some caches that are for non-premium members only?

NMOC? Now yer thinkin I can see it now "gc.com's first 'Non-Members' Only Cache. Please note if you're a premium member and you log a find on this cache it will be deleted by the cache owner."

Thorin

So if I let my membership lapse then log the cache, then pay again, do I get deleted or grandfathered?

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

The premium status is available to everyone regardless of skill level, geographics, and economic level.

But what if someone just doesn't need it? People buy premium membership because they get extra features, first of all the ability to do pocket queries. But someone who doesn't find pocket queries indispensable doesn't really need to be a premium member. Then why should he buy a premium membership? Placing a MOC is equivalent to saying: "hey, you are not using pocket queries? then I will not allow you to hunt for my cache unless you pay $3 to the company of my choice, even if you don't need their extra services". What's the point of that? :blink:

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

"hey, you are not using pocket queries? then I will not allow you to hunt for my cache unless you pay $3 to the company of my choice, even if you don't need their extra services". What's the point of that?

That is a premium member exercising their privilege. Just as when a non-member exercises their right to tell everyone on the forums that they don't think that people should pay for the services gc.com provides, or that by using those services they will become bad, elitist cachers.

Edit to add: Maybe one of the features they bought was the ability to reward like-minded individuals by placing MOC's.

Edited October 12, 2004 by Monkeybrad

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

"hey, you are not using pocket queries? then I will not allow you to hunt for my cache unless you pay $3 to the company of my choice, even if you don't need their extra services". What's the point of that?

Sometimes, some people just need to stroke the ole ego-

Ya know- its just not a good day until youve been deemed superior to someone else.

Pocket queries are worth $0.00 to me. Any other "added value" my $30 could buy are also worthless to me. Being unable to search MOC caches is not a big deal to me.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Edit to add: Maybe one of the features they bought was the ability to reward like-minded individuals by placing MOC's.

Like-minded as in: "hey, he also uses pocket queries, he must be a good guy?"

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

As77, I was a paying member before there was any benefits, just to support the site and that everyone should support the site if they look at it.

What’s the point of not being a paying member other to whine and complain that they can not use the services, if they are finding caches, reading the forums they are using the site, why not help out………….. JOE

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

why not help out…………

Why isn't the data free? (another topic already covered many times)

Principles.....?

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Like-minded as in "they have chosen to monetarily support the site that I have chosen to support, one of the benefits of this support is access to MOC's. Inorder for this to truly be a benefit someone has to place MOC's, I think I will continue my support of GC.com by placing some MOC's so my fellow premium members will have MOC's to hunt. The more MOC's that are placed, the more valuable it is to be able to access them, the more valuable that access is, the more people buy premium memberships, the more premium memberships are bought, the more money Jeremy and company make, the more money they make, the more money they will have to reinvest in the site, the more money is reinvested in the site the faster the site operates with more enhancments. So you see MOC placers are trying to improve this site so you will be able to log quicker, so you will have more time to come to the forums and argue over nothing.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

the more money is reinvested in the site the faster the site operates with more enhancments.

"Coming soon.... "insert it here" " :blink:

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

the more money is reinvested in the site the faster the site operates with more enhancments.

"Coming soon.... "insert it here" "

If I were TPTB, I would be more likely to listen to your complaints if you backed it up with a couple of bucks a month. I do not mean for that to sound rude, but you are complaining that they have not provided some enhancement (which costs money, even if only for programming time) in the same thread where you have stated that you are not interested in "ponying up the dough" for the current premium benefits.

Sorta like, you guys need to work faster to give me something I am not willing to pay for. To me that would fall on deaf ears.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

If I were TPTB, I would be more likely to listen to your complaints if you backed it up with a couple of bucks a month. I do not mean for that to sound rude, but you are complaining that they have not provided some enhancement (which costs money, even if only for programming time) in the same thread where you have stated that you are not interested in "ponying up the dough" for the current premium benefits.

I was just pointing out that many features have been talked about, are in he works, or soon to be added - yet many never seem to materialize.... Cost is part of it, but that wasnt my point. Its the carrot & stick approach thats keeps the $$ flowing.....

And No, im not interested in paying for any features I dont have use for.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Like-minded as in "they have chosen to monetarily support the site that I have chosen to support".

Well, I am a premium member but I'm afraid I'm not like-minded. I didn't choose to "support" Groundspeak, Inc. I chose to buy certain services from them. I consider it a business relationship. Just like when I pay my phone bill, I don't consider it a "support for the phone company so that they can improve their services"; I consider it a payment for the phone service they provide and that's it.

So you see, I'm not like-minded and I can still search for MOCs. Now what? :blink:

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Geez, you got me. I stumbled into your carefully crafted logic trap. I guess I will now hang my head in shame.

On the other hand, I could feel sorry for you, since you feel compelled to purchase a service from any entity that you do not wish to support. How unfortunate that they are the best thing going.

I guess I will be forced to broaden my views to include those unfortunate souls like yourself who do not like Groundspeak and who do not want to support them, but who do like the services that they provide for a fee.

So I will from now on place MOC's to reward the like-minded and to provide some comfort for those who spend their money to purchase services that they desire from an organization they do not wish to support.

Is that better?

Does the enitre discussion seem ludicrous yet?

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Does the enitre discussion seem ludicrous yet?

YET!? :blink:

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

The premium status is available to everyone regardless of skill level, geographics, and economic level.

But what if someone just doesn't need it?

T-H-E-N

S-H-U-T

T-H-E

'H'

U-P !!!!! (Sorry, I didn't mean to shout) :blink:

Stop complaining. If you don't see value in MOC, then stop complaining that you are being excluded.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

...and that everyone should support the site if they look at it.

And of course - following this logic - you also regularly drop a couple of philanthropic bucks at every site you visit on the Web, yes?

Personally I favor as77's logic:

...I chose to buy certain services from them. I consider it a business relationship. Just like when I pay my phone bill...

The point is Jo, if you want to donate to a for-profit company that's entirely up to you. But then... if your motives are purely benevolent, then why would you need MOCs (or any other premium perks for that matter) as some kind of reward?

Suffice that some of us just see it as a simple consumer issue. Like many I'm not inclined to purchase the presently offered perks for any amount. Indeed, as I've said before, I'm neither offended nor enamored by the MOCs, but rather, view them simply as a misguided and ineffective marketing technique - that's clearly turned out to be devisive at best.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Well said GG-

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

I have to respectfully disagree when it comes to MOC's being an ineffective marketing technique that have proven to be divisive at best.

I purchased my intial membership because of an MOC that piqued my interest. It turned out to be one of my favorite hunts ever. I later discovered how handy pq's were and the other benefits of membership.

For members this is all a non-issue. I rarely notice whether or not a cache is an MOC since it arrives in my pq regardless, it was not an issue that the pan and zoom on the maps have been corrected, it was not an issue that the OT forum was members only (in fact, I did not even realize it until non-members started complaining that the people who pay for the site were getting something that they were not).

It seems to me that the only time any of the member benefits become a divisive issue, is when someone who has chosen to not purchase a membership gets mad that they are not getting something else for nothing.

The situation is easily remedied, purchase a membership or stop complaining that those who have are getting something that you are not. The money is a non-issue, in the time it took to read this thread you could have pan-handled enough money to purchase a membership. If your disagreements with Groundspeak are philosophical, then do not purchase a membership, but do not complain that those who have purchased one are getting something you have not. That is the price of your convictions. If you do not see the value of membership, then do not purchase one, but do not complain because others do see the value, and do not pass judgement on them for taking advantage of the benefits that they have purchased.

It is all suddenly clear, this issue can be resolved by either purchasing a membership or by realizing that you have no right to judge those who do.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

On the other hand, I could feel sorry for you, since you feel compelled to purchase a service from any entity that you do not wish to support.

Huh? What do you mean by 'compelled'? I don't feel compelled, there's a service I'm buying.

unfortunate souls like yourself who do not like Groundspeak

Where did I say I didn't like them?

I don't like them and I don't dislike them. Why get emotional? I have a business relationship with a company.

and who do not want to support them

Support seems to me an inadequate term to use in connection with a company. When you pay your phone bill, do you feel that you 'support' the phone company because you like them? When you bought your car, did you feel that you 'support' the car manufacturer because they have made such a great car for you?

to purchase services that they desire from an organization they do not wish to support

Again, inadequate words to me. It's not an organization, it's a company that sells services and goods. Whether I buy those services and goods only depends on whether I need those services and goods and whether I think the price is right for me. 'Wish to support' doesn't make sense to me in association with a company. I don't 'wish to support' my phone company, I buy phone service from them. I'm not even interested in who the CEO of the phone company is and what his favorite ice cream is :blink:

And the same applies to a company named Grounded, Inc. Corporation (address: 2111 3rd Ave West Seattle, WA 98119) that, according to the Trademark Office, provides services belonging to International Class Code 041 (entertainment services, namely providing on-line information for a GPS based treasure hunting game) and sells goods belonging to International Class Code 025 (clothing, namely shirts, hats, vests, jackets, shoes and pants).

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Congratulations on your information gathering skills.

sup·port P Pronunciation Key (s-pôrt, -prt)

tr.v. sup·port·ed, sup·port·ing, sup·ports

To bear the weight of, especially from below.

To hold in position so as to keep from falling, sinking, or slipping.

To be capable of bearing; withstand: “His flaw'd heart... too weak the conflict to support” (Shakespeare).

To keep from weakening or failing; strengthen: The letter supported him in his grief.

To provide for or maintain, by supplying with money or necessities.

By exchanging money for services you support Groundspeak.

When I purchase things I buy from companies that I wish to support, either because of the great product that they make or because I agree with them and they have something I desire. I do not purchase things from companies that I disagree with philosophically or who provide a poor product.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

So in summary, MOC are frowed upon in general by non premium members.

Premium members don't really notice them because they are transparent to normal caching methods.

As for the support vs. services argument. I'm not sure what to make of it. You support a business by buying goods and services, which is pretty much pocket queries here. You support a non profit by donating money even if you don't need their token goods and services. GC.com has elements of both in how it's put together, how it operates, and how people think about it.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

It seems to me that the only time any of the member benefits become a divisive issue, is when someone who has chosen to not purchase a membership gets mad that they are not getting something else for nothing.

Well, again: I am a premium member and I still frown upon MOCs and consider them elitistic unless there is some valid reason behind making a cache subscriber-only, like minimizing traffic in a sensitive area.

Honestly, the concept of MOCs reminds me a bit of a pyramid game or multilevel marketing where after you pay, you are supposed to recruit more paying participants. I never liked that concept. I just want to be a plain customer of Groundspeak and I don't want to become part of their marketing scheme. I will gladly tell my friends about how enjoyable geocaching is but I don't want to coerce anyone into becoming a paying member by placing MOCs.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

By exchanging money for services you support Groundspeak.

I don't think that's what you meant when you said you want to favor like-minded people. I think you meant that you would even give your money to Groundspeak if you didn't need any of its services, just because you like them. If you just want to favor people who use pocket queries, I don't see the point. Why are people who don't need pocket queries not worthy of having the opportunity to find some of your caches?

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Why are people who don't need pocket queries not worthy of having the opportunity to find some of your caches?

I think a more relavent question is ... Why does a dog lick his crotch?

Answer - Because he can.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Why are people who don't need pocket queries not worthy of having the opportunity to find some of your caches?

I think a more relavent question is ... Why does a dog lick his crotch?

Answer - Because he can.

Wrong answer CP....because he cannot make a fist

MOC's have their time and place, so do non MOC's. Why are some folks getting their shorts in a wad?

the day Use Fee for Texas State Parks is $3.00 per day per person, there are plenty of caches hidden in State Parks and I KNOW we have spent over $30.00 in State Park fees to do caches, so why is it raising such a noise about $30.00 a year for a premium membership which gets you WAY MORE than only MOC's?

not everything in life is fair, free, or for everyone.

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Why are people who don't need pocket queries not worthy of having the opportunity to find some of your caches?

I think a more relavent question is ... Why does a dog lick his crotch?

Answer - Because he can.

Wrong answer CP....because he cannot make a fist

I stand corrected ... :blink: :unsure:

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

GC.com has elements of both in how it's put together, how it operates

That sounds interesting. Could you mention a few nonprofit-like elements?

Do you think that there can be a "transitional state" between non-profit and for-profit?

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

Clear path is correct, but clarify even further.

In my area the majority of cachers who are active are premium members. So this is basically a non-issue. The majority of my caches are not MOC's. The ones that are MOC's are because I chose to use a feature that I pay for. Sometimes it is to limit access, sometimes it is because I want to look at the audit logs and see who is looking at the caches, sometimes it is to discourage pirates, sometimes it is just to annoy a vocal non-member. I see no reason to not place MOC's, no one is excluded, you just need special equipment, a membership.

You ask why some people are not worthy to find some of my caches, that choice is one they made on their own. It is not that they are not worthy, but they have chosen to not participate in the hunting of MOC's by not purchasing a membership.

To twist that same rhetorical mirror around. Are my MOC's not worthy of being hunted?

Posted October 12, 2004 · October 12, 2004

. . . Just like when I pay my phone bill, I don't consider it a "support for the phone company so that they can improve their services"; I consider it a payment for the phone service they provide and that's it.

But, to receive services of any kind from the phone company you must first pay, then receive the service. One could say the same about commercial software - you pay, then your receive the service/product.

Geocaching.com is more like shareware. There are a few premium features to encourage people to support the service, but the vast majority of operability is free. Geocaching.com provides a effective and well implemented (relative to any other geocaching site I've seen) free service for 1000s of people. That is a huge commitment of time and resources without any demand for payment up front or even payment ever.

Too cool!

Personally, I would like to see geocaching.com stick around for a while. I would rather not have TPTB and the support staff all leave for better jobs that pay them a more livable wage than they can earn providing our community this service. TPTB deserve to be able to put food on their table, and I am happy to do what I can to contribute to the continuation of this sport, which is, for now, in its current form, dependent on geocaching.com.

Sure, they could do more, but what is available now is quite functional. The loss of geocaching.com would be a huge loss to the community.

So, if I were to place a MOC, it would not be an elitist endeaver or pyrmid scheme, it would simply a user trying to encourage other users to help keep the community alive, just like lobbying for a levy to raise taxes a few bucks a year to maintain a community swimmingpool or park. It's not paying the phone bill, it's paying taxes volunterily. :blink:

Gosh, and then the premium features are just a bonus for being a good citizen, they have nothing to do with paying for elitist services.

Members Only Caches

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