Premium Member

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

If you want to support the website by becoming a premium member, then that's great, but can we just stop with the criticism of those that choose not to? It's getting tiresome.

I agree. There are some remarks being made here that are unwarranted. No one in here knows the personal finances of the non paying members, or the reason they chose not to become paying members.

People contribute to this site any many ways that might not include becoming a paid member. They but the merchandise offered for sale. They tell others about caching and those people become paying members. They may help out newbies so they don't get discouraged and leave the game. The list can go on and on.

I am a Charter Member and will always be one.

El Diablo

Edited January 1, 2005 by El Diablo

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

I think he's referring to the continuing general insults which come in the form of judging other cachers, by calling them cheap or moochers. I know you already addressed that issue, yet it continues. I think that's what he means. Sorry if I misinterpreted that.

If that's the reference, it isn't a personal insult but a general opinion about users who don't become Premium Members. I haven't seen anyone post a direct insult about someone else.

Hmmm... I see the point, but at the same time labelling users of the site who don't become premium members as mooches is not meaningfully different than saying DaveA is a user that isn't a premium member therefore he is a mootch.

If calling me a mooch directly is an insult, then why wouldn't calling me and numerous others mooches indirectly be an insult?

I know that I generally don't appreciate being called derogatory names regardless of whether I am singled out or included in a group.

If I say "Christians are mindless twits" is that OK because I didn't single out a specific Christian? How about if I say "Blacks are subhuman"? Is that OK because I didn't single out a specific person?

I think you get my point. Giving derogatory labels to groups of people isn't meaningfully different than singling out individuals. If anything it is worse due to the wholesale predjudice involved.

There are websites I have subscribed to and GC.com is one I have considered subscribing to, but as a general rule I am not interested in paying money to sites where people get away with denigrating others while the ownership/administration appears indifferent.

My 2 cents

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

Your argument doesn't make any logical sense so I'm not exactly sure how to respond. Did someone call you a mooch?

(edit: former comment was too abstract)

Edited January 1, 2005 by Jeremy

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

If you can't tell the difference between a pineapple and a grenade, avoid eating pineapples at all costs.

I don't understand your point. Are you saying that insulting some groups in a general fashion is wrong, but insulting other groups in a gneral fashion is OK?

If so is it your position that those who don't pay to use the services of your site that you offer for free are OK to insult as long as all people are insulted generally rather than by name?

While I am not a premium member, I have made purchases from the store and I have introduced others to this site. As such I think I am supporting the site and don't care to be called a mooch. I do take offense at the comment.

Are you saying you just don't give a hoot?

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

Acually in my first post I indicated that there are other ways to be contributing members of the activity. If someone has a different opinion I can disagree but that still entitles someone to their own opinion, just like accusing folks as being suckups for being pro-Groundspeak.

Comparing the denegration of a race to a topic regarding how someone who doesn't get a Premium Membership is a moocher is repugnant. Your argument is meant to be inflammatory and counterproductive. There's no point arguing with you further.

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

This is an interesting thread. I'd like to know what the threshold for folks in the reasoning behind "weighed options and it ain't worth it" need to become Premium Members. Please no "if you changed x policy" because we don't change our principles for monetary gain. More like "If you provided x feature I would join."

Granted, we provide a whole heck of a lot for free, but contributing members who place well thought out caches are just as valuable as folks who provide monetary support for the site, in my book.

So, we're looking for a.) These are the features which would cause me to make the jump into Premium. and NOT b.) This is what makes me so mad that I won't join.

I waited a year to join, and it was because my financial priorities had to place geocaching far down the list. When I joined (and I've never run a pq yet), it was to support the sport the best way - and I enjoy OT forum. It was after I'd pretty much accomplished my Cache Placement goals and bought my own Vista.

Jeremy, as to discussing insults: Sorry, got to disagree with you on this one. I don't have to name a specific individual in order to say that these blind officials only see what they want to see, and seem to protect, in their willful misuse of power, the ignorant accusers of the innocent. Oops, sorry, but then that wasn't aimed an any named individual. If you allow insults to the non-paying members that might easily be badly received. There aren't any handgrenades masquerading as pineapples here.

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

Acually in my first post I indicated that there are other ways to be contributing members of the activity. If someone has a different opinion I can disagree but that still entitles someone to their own opinion, just like accusing folks as being suckups for being pro-Groundspeak.

Comparing the denegration of a race to a topic regarding how someone who doesn't get a Premium Membership is a moocher is repugnant. Your argument is meant to be inflammatory and counterproductive. There's no point arguing with you further.

Thank you for clarifying. That was what I wanted. My denigrating a race caused you some offense and that was my goal. I don't actually hold that opinion of any race, of course.

My intent was to get you to see that insulting a group is just as offensive (to the members of the group) as insulting an individual. Those who are members of the group will all take offense.

What you have made clear is that when premium members refer to the other users of this site derogatively, you do not care.

Certainly it is your right to care or not care. My goal was to determine only if you did care or not. Now that I have the answer there is no point in continuing the discussion.

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

I added one since the last update:

1) Too broke.

2) Too lazy.

3) Don't want to pay for what I can get free.

4) Don't want to support this site.

5) Want to but can't for some reason.

6) Added up the value I get and it fell short of the fee.

7) Another family member has the paid account.

8) Unable to use the payment methods available.

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

I became a premium member to support the site. That being said, I feel I have a right...no, sacred duty to request an avatar change from Jeremy. You look like the "fabled, demented green baron frog from King County"! If you want my 30 bones next year you MUST change your avatar! This is non-negotiable! For the love of God and all that is holy, please comply with our demand!

Signed,

The holy jihad against bad avatars.

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

Jeremy, as to discussing insults: Sorry, got to disagree with you on this one.

That's fair. I went back after I read your comment and saw two terms, parasite and mooch, to define people that don't provide a monetary support for the site (or list a cache for that matter). Being from the old BBS community where you're called a leech if you don't provide a good upload/download ratio for files (old school), I suppose I have become indifferent about the whole leech/mooch/parasite comparison. When I was in the BBS I accepted that I was often a leech because that was the path that I decided to take. If someone called me a leech I wouldn't really care.

About memberships I already explained my position on them. If someone thinks you're a mooch or parasite I can't change that, but they are entitled to that opinion just like you may be entitled to your own opinion on someone's actions. It didn't seem to get out of hand here and it does not compare at all to calling someone inhuman or stupid. A term like mooch is just describing an action, IMO. Subhuman is describing an individual.

But its all semantics at the end of the day. How PC does this board need to be?

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

I became a premium member to support the site. That being said, I feel I have a right...no, sacred duty to request an avatar change from Jeremy. You look like the "fabled, demented green baron frog from King County"! If you want my 30 bones next year you MUST change your avatar! This is non-negotiable! For the love of God and all that is holy, please comply with our demand!

Signed,

The holy jihad against bad avatars.

Yea, am I the only one thinking about this???-

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

Yea, am I the only one thinking about this???

Perhaps. Perhaps not. But you're definitely the most vocal about it (and the most off-topic).

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

i like jeremy's present avatar, but then i have a flamingo as mine.

on topic: join or don't. pay or don't. it's your choice.

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

Yea, am I the only one thinking about this???

Perhaps. Perhaps not. But you're definitely the most vocal about it (and the most off-topic).

Aww C'mon Jeremy! I thought you'd come up with a better response to this light-hearted post! I was on topic! LOL! I keed...I keed!!!

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

About memberships I already explained my position on them. If someone thinks you're a mooch or parasite I can't change that, but they are entitled to that opinion just like you may be entitled to your own opinion on someone's actions. It didn't seem to get out of hand here and it does not compare at all to calling someone inhuman or stupid. A term like mooch is just describing an action, IMO. Subhuman is describing an individual.

But its all semantics at the end of the day. How PC does this board need to be?

I think a person is entitled to their opinion as well. The only question is are they entitled to EXPRESS that opinion on your website?

If my opinion is that blacks are subhuman (it isn't, this is just an example) can I post here even though I hold that opinion? Of course I can. The only time a problem would occur is if I use this forum to EXPRESS that opinion.

As you have said, there is nothing you can do about the opinions some hold. That is true, but you can do something about the opinions people express using your site.

The question is what is acceptable to you and what isn't? Clearly expressing racist opinions is not acceptable to you. Great, I would certainly hope that is the case. What I have trouble understanding is that when users of your site are labelled parasites, mooches, cheapskates or whathaveyou, you appear to be OK with that.

And I am OK with your being OK with that, it is your site after all and you make the rules. At the same time if your lack of concern on this issue resulted in some writing off the possiblity of financially supporting this site due to that attitude I wouldn't blame them.

How PC does this site need to be? I dunno, that's up to you. As to my personal opinion I think that when you see a thread where users are being derogatively labelled you would do well to either not post in the thread at all or to post a mild admonishment of the derogatory labels. That's my opinion. I don't think anyone needs to be banned or anything drastic, it just surprises me that when folks are telling you they view the labels as insulting you express indifference.

Again, it is your right and all.

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

I told myself I wasn't going to post in here again, but darn that uper.......she needs to get stronger handcuffs!

I think DaveA has some good points. Some VERY good points which he has expressed well and politely.

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

My approach is that folks in the forums should be adults and shouldn't need babysitters. Mods should only step in when they have to.

Lack of action against particular threads does not constitute any kind of opinion on the matter. Normally I don't even bother reading the forums unless someone points out a particular thread to me. The same goes for the moderators. If you feel particularly insulted use the Report link available on every post on the site.

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

My approach is that folks in the forums should be adults and shouldn't need babysitters. Mods should only step in when they have to.

Lack of action against particular threads does not constitute any kind of opinion on the matter. Normally I don't even bother reading the forums unless someone points out a particular thread to me. The same goes for the moderators. If you feel particularly insulted use the Report link available on every post on the site.

I agree, adults shouldn't need babysitting. But sometimes adults don't act like adults, either.

Regardless, I think it would speak volumes if the owner of the website would not allow others to speak poorly of other members in any way, regarding membership status. It's one thing to have an opinion, it's quite another to be insulting. If registered members of this website are good enough to be allowed to BE members, then it would be nice if the owner would defend their right to be paying or non-paying, and not allow one group to be pitted against the other. As this thread has shown, this accomplishes nothing but fosters ill will.

I DO understand that you feel that non-paying members contribute in other ways, and maybe you won't convince those who feel otherwise, but isn't enough enough? How long does this have to go on? It's approaching dead horse status, if it's not there already.

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

I am far to new to this site and geocaching to be posting a message to this thread, but perhaps the perspective of a new person will be helpful.. I don’t get this “support the site” argument. This is a commercial site that is supported by a store and a few advertisers I think. It is open to the public and if someone wants the extra benefits that are available from a premium membership they can pay a small amount of money to have them. What is there to argue about? How can anyone call people names if they choose not to avail themselves of the extra benefits?

2Tango

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

I am far to new to this site and geocaching to be posting a message to this thread, but perhaps the perspective of a new person will be helpful.. I don’t get this “support the site” argument. This is a commercial site that is supported by a store and a few advertisers I think. It is open to the public and if someone wants the extra benefits that are available from a premium membership they can pay a small amount of money to have them. What is there to argue about? How can anyone call people names if they choose not to avail themselves of the extra benefits?

2Tango

Just curious...Who are the advertisers?

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

I assumed "REI.com" was.

1Tango

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

I know this is not answering the question asked, since I asked it, but people have been listing there reasons for becoming Premium Members. It was actually after reading a topic like this one about the pros and cons of paying that I made my decision.

I became a PM after about 6 months and 50 finds. It took me about that long to admit to myself that I real enjoyed this hobby.

My initial reason for paying was to support this site. It was after this that I realized all the added benefits of being a PM. I feel that I have received ample return on my purchase. As to whether or not someone is getting rich I don’t care. I’m pretty sure someone is getting rich at Nike when I buy there shoes but I keep buying them. I’m glad it is optional to pay or not. It makes me feel even better that I joined of my own free will.

Sorry, now back to the original topic

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

I assumed "REI.com" was.

1Tango

K...I'm noy sure who "REI.com" is. Not trying to be a S.A....Don't take me wrong. I've never heard of them...link please.

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

K...I'm noy sure who "REI.com" is. Not trying to be a S.A....Don't take me wrong. I've never heard of them...link please.

try here. it's on the front page.

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

This is on the geocaching.com's main page.

Gear up with REI and Geocaching.com
Geocaching.com has partnered with REI to help you gear up for your next outdoor adventure! Getting started with geocaching? Visit REI.com for GPS Receivers from Garmin and Magellan. Or you can check out the Deal of the Day at REI-OUTLET

2Tango

Posted January 1, 2005 · January 1, 2005

This is on the geocaching.com's main page.

Gear up with REI and Geocaching.com
Geocaching.com has partnered with REI to help you gear up for your next outdoor adventure! Getting started with geocaching? Visit REI.com for GPS Receivers from Garmin and Magellan. Or you can check out the Deal of the Day at REI-OUTLET

2Tango

Hmmm...See your point! No add banner thou...and no direct link. No blatant adds but a defident association with GS.

Posted January 2, 2005 · January 2, 2005

I closed this thread because it is getting a little off topic and a new thread has been started that asks the question very well. Please go to "What new features would entice you...". Thanks for your responses

Premium Member

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