Jump to content

Today's Cacher


El Diablo

Recommended Posts

I've gotten a lot of emails about the magazine being biased. I think it's time I make a statement.

 

Today's Cacher Is a mgazine that provides entertainment and information. It is not, and never will be a magazine that covers gossip, speculation or allow someone to get up on their personal soapbox (except in my editorials).

 

It is said that The magazine, (mainly because of me), is biased towards Geocaching.com Let me set the record straight.

 

I am pro Geocaching.com I'm also proud to say they are a sponser. I was pro Geocaching.com long before I started the magazine. They are a good company with great people, and I support them 100%.

 

Geocaching.com, nor any other enity, or person has ever influenced this magazine, besides my team. Sometimes someone may point out a flaw or a point and we go with it, but never has anyone ever stopped us from publishing an article.

 

Now to those that want to disagree with all I just said, don't read the magazine if you don't like it. Start your own. This magazine will always support Geocaching.com and it's members.

 

Is that clear?

 

Jerry Carter

Publisher

Today's Cacher

Link to comment

I don't know if it's biased or not, and I really don' t care. If it were to have an obvious, to me, bias, then I would just filter it through the knowledge that it has that bias.

 

Like any other magazine, it has some stuff in it that interests me, and some that doesn't. Some issues I got something out of that was worthwhile to me, some I didn't. I applaud and appreciate the effort that goes into it and hope it keeps on being published.

Link to comment
...Very decisive. Read the original post.

 

El Diablo

What I read is that you yourself choose to support geocaching.com and that is not influenced by geocaching.com or any other entity. Thus your bias is your own.

 

It's unclear to me if that's what you meant or if I have misread what you were trying to say. That's why I asked a question to clarify it. Your single word answer did not help me understand what you said any better. My smarmy response was because I wanted to draw out some kind of better explanation.

 

This isn't one of our debates. You will either clarify or not as you see fit. I hope you do, but I'm not going to any more rounds with you to try to catch your meaning.

Link to comment

Does Archeaology magazine have a bias towards excavations sponsored by universities and against Joe Blow digging bottles in the old town dump? Does Backpacker magazine have a bias in favor of Kelty, Lowe, Rachlie, North Face, etc... and against some lady making outdoor equipment on her sewing machine?

 

Since the overwhelming majority of geocachers use Geocaching.com and the geocaching culture is virtually centered here, of course you should be focused on this site. It would be irresponsible to give equal coverage to the tiny mom and pop sites that are out there. Of course it would also be poor practice to ignore them and I don't think you do. They get the coverage they deserve and if they ever grow to where they have a significant following I'm sure you will give them appropriate coverage.

Link to comment

The difference, Brian, is that if another site came along and started gathering caches in the ten's of thousands and had oodles of features that Jerry would still be biased towards one site.

 

It's not that they want to address folks that visit gc.com, that's a given as they are geocachers. It's the obvious lack of inclusion of the whole of the geocaching world.

 

I illustrated this somewhere a while back where the bias is painfully obvious when someone compained in the Letters to the Editor section about his moving cache being shot down. There was a response by one of the editorial staff directly to that letter basically saying that "moving cache aren't allowed" giving the impression that moving caches just aren't allowed period. No helpful mention that moving caches are allowed on alternate sites. It's as if there was no solution the gentleman's problem. That's the type of bias we're seeing.

 

It's unfortunate that it has to be that way. It cost them advertising from us. It cost them a subscription from us. Apparently, that's okay with them.

Link to comment
The difference, Brian, is that if another site came along and started gathering caches in the ten's of thousands and had oodles of features that Jerry would still be biased towards one site.

 

If you know that for a fact, then I'd have to say he would be wrong, but you don't know that for a fact.

 

There was a response by one of the editorial staff directly to that letter basically saying that "moving cache aren't allowed" giving the impression that moving caches just aren't allowed period. No helpful mention that moving caches are allowed on alternate sites.

 

You know as well as anybody, when someone is asking about, or questioning a policy it is a GC.COM policy they are referring to. The geocaching world is GC.COM centric whether you like it or not.

Link to comment

Let's play fair, Jerry, and lay some facts on the table.

 

You told the cachers that use www.terracaching.com that they were welcome to submit an article about Terracaching and its unique scoring system.

 

You received this article and complained in broad, general comments in the Terracaching forum that the content read like an advertisement and it turned you off.

 

You then complained about people (not the author, the facts of the article, the website itself, or anything else) who were complaining about your comments.

 

You then decided the article would not run. When asked why you simply reiterated that you would not run the article.

 

Imagine that. People who read the tagline "...for geocachers everywhere" are annoyed that you unexplainedly decided to can an article about a form of geocaching that they are happy with.

 

I don't care who or what you put in your magazine. Your journalistic credibility and objectivity is non-existent and therefore your magazine will be what it is: a flop rag that panders to the majority while keeping in line with your personal agenda.

 

Magazines need not be soapboxes, attack tools, or anything else in order to cater to the entire hobby. But you've done one better and decided it won't do anything but shine shoes. There's a great deal of this hobby that's fit to print that doesn't involve this website or its policies. There are issues that even a large portion of the users at this website want investigated or are simply interested to read into (like why it's been months and still no Buxley update). From your own words it sounds like none of these things will ever be in the pages of Today's Cacher because you have pulled back the curtain and the wizard is a frog lover.

 

Have fun with that.

Link to comment

I think it is of tantamount importance to always remember that geocaching.com is merely a listing service and proponent of the game; it is not the game.

 

With that in mind, I think it would be a great disservice to all geocachers if your personal bias in favor of one listing service (geocaching.com) caused your magazine to ignore problems or deficiencies specific to geocaching.com while also ignoring positive aspects and/or developments of other listing services (and/or proponents of the game.)

Link to comment

<_< Oh good grief. Hey Jerry. I like it, most people probably do too. If someone doesn't want to read it for whatever reason that's their problem. Definitely not yours. Saying Today's Cacher is biased towards Geocaching is about absurd, isn't it intended for those interested in Geocaching? Good grief, people have to have something to complain about all the friggin time. Ignore them, delete them and carry on. I think it's great and I appreciate the time and effort that goes into it.

 

Thank you for your contributions!!!

 

:ph34r:

Link to comment
You then decided the article would not run.

Interesting development.

 

I hadn't been on the TC forums for a while so I jumped over and it was some interesting reading. Too bad the majority of Today's Cacher readers can't read what the publisher had to say. I'd bet many more would be turned off, too.

 

I now know the decision to not contribute to Today's Cacher in the manner Jerry suggested was the right one. I highly suspect the offer was ruse from the beginning to make me, or my opinions, look like an idiot by twisting my words.

 

No thanks.

Link to comment
The geocaching world is GC.COM centric whether you like it or not.

So you're saying because gc.com is the center and they no longer will consider new moving caches, that there should be no moving caches?

No.

Then what are you saying? That gc.com sets policy? That whenever someone talks about policy it is gc.com policy and nothing else? That when you are talking policy it's not allowed to mention alternatives--alternatives that will actually allow you to do what you want to do? What?

Link to comment
I've gotten a lot of emails about the magazine being biased. I think it's time I make a statement.

I don't understand why you keep taking offense at people telling you that they perceive the mag to have a bias.

 

Are you offended or do you just want to keep mentioning your now for profit venture here?

 

I mean your explanation pretty much reveals that you are GC.com centric which is perfectly fine, it is your right to be that way.

 

Thing is, if you are that way, why do you get upset when people point out that you are that way?

 

At some point it just seems like you are doing nothing more than advertising your for profit magazine here.

Link to comment

yep, biased. i think the whole problem could be cleared right up by not claiming to be the magazine for "geocachers everywhere", but rather the "magazine companion of gc.com" or some other such thing.

 

i don't cache out of other listing sites. i just don't. if you want to be fair though, you have to call it what it is. if you won't run articles about other lising sites, you're not the magazine for "geocachers everywhere".

 

you shouldn't have to be though, if what you want to be is the magazine for gc.com, which is useful in and of itself. there just wouldn't be a debate about it. i think what you're running into is people who don't like a magazine that won't represent them purporting to be a magazine for them.

 

simply deciding to be ONE OR THE OTHER would shut everyone the heck up.

Link to comment
At some point it just seems like you are doing nothing more than advertising your for profit magazine here.

 

That is definitely what is seems like. Otherwise, why even bring it up in these forums.

 

So if it an be viewed as blatant advertisement...why isn't this topic closed and removed by TPTB? Hmmmm..... <_< Just 2 days ago...they closed a topic just because TPTB "felt" like the rules were broken.

 

- GeoMike

Link to comment

Well said Jerry!

 

I appluad you for making that statement. People can whine and complain all they want about the lack of attention the other sites get. The fact is that GC.com is THE main source when it come to geocaching. They started this whole thing and without it I think it would fade considerably.

 

Yes, GC.com has changed some of their rules since it all began a few years back but they are not so radical it has ruined the game.

 

What it comes down to, most of the time, is that people can't do things they way they want to so they get pissy about it. Example... We had a local cacher that wanted to place a series of caches but they didn't fall within the guidlines of GC.com. So he went on this big campaign to move to Navicache where "we" could hide "good and creative" caches. Let's just say it fell short! The shame of it is, he has placed some rellay great caches.

 

O.k. enough babble...

 

If you have that big of a problem with gc.com., please take your ammo can and go home. There are plenty of us that can have fun and enjoy this game without you!

 

Have a great weekend everybody!!

Edited by Special Ed
Link to comment
At some point it just seems like you are doing nothing more than advertising your for profit magazine here.

 

That is definitely what is seems like. Otherwise, why even bring it up in these forums.

 

So if it an be viewed as blatant advertisement...why isn't this topic closed and removed by TPTB? Hmmmm..... <_< Just 2 days ago...they closed a topic just because TPTB "felt" like the rules were broken.

 

- GeoMike

Closing duplicate threads is not unusual. If you have an issue with forum moderation, take it up with TPTB.

Link to comment
Well said Jerry!

 

I appluad you for making that statement. People can whine and complain all they want about the lack of attention the other sites get. The fact is that GC.com is THE main source when it come to geocaching. They started this whole thing and without it I think it would fade considerably.

 

Yes, GC.com has changed some of their rules since it all began a few years back but they are not so radical it has ruined the game.

 

What it comes down to, most of the time, is that people can't do things they way they want to so they get pissy about it. Example... We had a local cacher that wanted to place a series of caches but they didn't fall within the guidlines of GC.com. So he went on this big campaign to move to Navicache where "we" could hide "good and creative" caches. Let's just say it fell short! The shame of it is, he has placed some rellay great caches.

 

O.k. enough babble...

 

If you have that big of a problem with gc.com., please take your ammo can and go home. There are plenty of us that can have fun and enjoy this game without you!

 

Have a great weekend everybody!!

I think the issue is more than just that. Obviously, since this is the Geocaching.com forum, people shouldn't advertise for other listing sites. Since Today's Cacher is the magazine "for Geocachers everywhere", it should have articles that represent the geocaching community as a whole. That would include mentioning other listing sites.

 

Now, since 99% of cachers are on Geocaching.com, then 99% of the articles will likely be from/about Geocaching.com's cachers. The other 1% would cover sites like Terracaching.com, Navicache.com, etc. If those other sites grow, then I would expect the magazine to publish more articles about them. Based on Navicache's history, it won't happen anytime soon.

 

Geocaching.com is good enough for the vast majority of "Geocachers everywhere" that they don't have to check other sites before heading off into the woods. All the caches they need are right here, with more being placed everyday.

Link to comment

In the spirit of being Un Biased, how about an article from one of the competing sites showing a comparison of the various cache listing sites (ala Consumer Reports)? I don't see how El Diablo would have a problem with a cut and dry comparison chart <_< (I think I know who most people would choose based on the number of features)

Link to comment

Face it...GC.com is the "Microsoft" of the caching world...if you choose to be pro-GC.com, you'll be just fine.

 

Those folks that are anti-establishment (i.e. anti-GC.com) probably lean towards being that way anyway...regardless what the issue is.

 

I find it interesting to see posters out there with 1,000s of posts...who give you, ED, a hard time about being pro-GC.com. The fact that they are on here everyday...posting away, is evidence of where GC.com sits in the caching world. Brings to mind the old adage about biting the hand that feeds you...

Link to comment

 

Those folks that are anti-establishment (i.e. anti-GC.com) probably lean towards being that way anyway...regardless what the issue is.

While there may be some who are anti GC.com, that isn't what the issue/controversy is about.

 

You have erected a strawman.

Link to comment
Does it really matter? ...

Yes and no.

 

Yes because it's good to know where someone stands. No becasue GC.com is the 800 lb gorilla and you have to write based on where the action is. It's like a 4x4 Magazine covering Jeep.

 

Personally, I read stories that catch my interest and I've read one editorial where El D took a stand that wasn't in harmony with TPTB.

 

A lot of people that I respect write for Todays Cacher. It would be nice to know where El D's lead is going to take them.

Link to comment
I am pro Geocaching.com I'm also proud to say they are a sponser. I was pro Geocaching.com long before I started the magazine. They are a good company with great people, and I support them 100%.

 

And I support you 100%.

 

A far as I'm concerned, the other sites are nothing more than a gathering of secessionists who want to play by their own rules.

The less popular cache listing sites are complaining because they aren't getting as much recognition as geocaching.com is. Too bad! When they become the majority listing sites, they will have a bigger mouthpiece.

Link to comment
DaveA...did you read anything else in my post...?

 

I find it interesting when you place a thought out post and all you get back is a one line dissection...

 

Just wondering

Yes, I read the entirety of your post. Your first paragraph likened GC.com to Microsoft. Your second paragraph labelled folks anti GC.com. Your final paragraph once again draws attention to the dominance of GC.com and labels the group in the second paragraph as folks who bite the hand that feeds them.

 

My point is that the criticism of TC isn't coming from GC.com haters. I don't know what the opinion of anyone is as I can't see through the monitor into people's minds, but looking at the criticism of TC here it seems rude and frankly defensive on your part to label folks the way you have.

 

One criticism is that the mag labels itself as for cachers everywhere. Some have responded that unexplained editorial decisions have been made to not run material on other sites or perspectives. The complaint is that this contradicts the mag's stated scope.

 

My personal criticism is that TC is now a for profit venture and the owner keeps making posts here about his money making venture.

 

Ultimately I don't care one way or the other what material TC decides to publish and I suspect that Jeremy is fine with the threads which are basically free advertising for TC.

 

I do find the latter mildly offensive though and can understand where those who are irked at the former are coming from. I don't think either criticism makes one a GC.com hater.

Link to comment

O.k. enough babble...

 

If you have that big of a problem with gc.com., please take your ammo can and go home. There are plenty of us that can have fun and enjoy this game without you!

You see....that's just the point. Those who have problems with GC.com don't need to pickup their ammocan and go home. The game of geocaching exists in different variations for different people. Mention of those variations should be made in a magazine that proports to be for geocachers everywhere, or else, drop the line and call it the magazine for GC.com enthusiasts.

 

However, I am still undecided at this point. I enjoyed seeing the article on MovingCache.com in this last issue, but believe that TC.com should get a fair shake as well....

 

Now I'm going to go play with my ammocans <_< because I too can play this game wherever I choose to.

Link to comment

I read it that Jerry is personally biased toward GC.com but his magazine, while supporting GC.com, is not.

 

That's what I thought he was saying.

 

I admit I may not know all the facts involved in this----I have not yet read the terracaching thread--however, it is a little disturbing that they would reject an article outright about another listing site without giving them a chance or suggestions on changing content.

 

was such a chance given?

 

an editor can reject an article for whatever reason, but it seems like this would be an interesting thing for geocachers in general to know about.

 

If the tone or slant is an issue, maybe it could just be re-written.

 

I like Today's Cacher.

 

--later--

 

I just read the terracaching thread. I'm not sure what happened. it seems that concerns were expressed over the advertising tone of the article, but I'm not sure an offer was made to change it. I could be wrong. it was hard to tell with all the mud flying around. and then El Diablo said he would not print it.

 

I'm not sure if it can be re-submitted in another form for next issue or not.

 

I write a lot for my job, maybe I could take a look at it and rework it so it's acceptable.

Edited by mozartman
Link to comment
At some point it just seems like you are doing nothing more than advertising your for profit magazine here.

 

That is definitely what is seems like. Otherwise, why even bring it up in these forums.

 

So if it an be viewed as blatant advertisement...why isn't this topic closed and removed by TPTB? Hmmmm..... <_< Just 2 days ago...they closed a topic just because TPTB "felt" like the rules were broken.

 

- GeoMike

Closing duplicate threads is not unusual. If you have an issue with forum moderation, take it up with TPTB.

First.....to stay "on topic"...as a newbie...I enjoy Today's Cacher. And to be honest, I am still too new to even know that there be any gc.com centric tendencies in the articles. After reading this thread...I am learning that there are other sites I was not even aware of.

 

And if the Editor, indeed, has no qualms about being gc.com biased...I am completely okay with it. But I agree with another poster that say "just remove the statement saying it was meant for Geocachers everywhere "

 

Now back to responding to your statement....

 

Understood about the duplicate postings....but according to that thread, it was done in the multiple countries areas to insure folks in each country saw it. The original poster was advised that threads meant for all areas should be in the "Geocaching topics" area. The original poster also apologized.

 

So if they are going to close duplicates...then close the threads in other listings and not the one in the area where the poster was advised it should be. So did TPTB close ALL threads on this topic in an effort to stiffle the dicsussion?

 

And the point I was originally attempting to make is....they closed that other discussion very quickly, but I see this one continuing without intervention..even though one could very easily perceive the OP as advertisement

 

My point is.....TPTB felt that duplicate post was a violation of gc.com policy and closed the thread very quickly to prevent further discussion. The OP on this thread seems to violate gc.com policy by being an advertisement for a "for profit" venture thinly disguised as an stating an "opinion" and essentially telling everyone that it was "tuff sh*t" if others didn't agree with him.

 

- GeoMike

Link to comment
At some point it just seems like you are doing nothing more than advertising your for profit magazine here.

 

That is definitely what is seems like. Otherwise, why even bring it up in these forums.

 

So if it an be viewed as blatant advertisement...why isn't this topic closed and removed by TPTB? Hmmmm..... <_< Just 2 days ago...they closed a topic just because TPTB "felt" like the rules were broken.

 

- GeoMike

Closing duplicate threads is not unusual. If you have an issue with forum moderation, take it up with TPTB.

First.....to stay "on topic"...as a newbie...I enjoy Today's Cacher. And to be honest, I am still too new to even know that there be any gc.com centric tendencies in the articles. After reading this thread...I am learning that there are other sites I was not even aware of.

 

And if the Editor, indeed, has no qualms about being gc.com biased...I am completely okay with it. But I agree with another poster that say "just remove the statement saying it was meant for Geocachers everywhere "

 

Now back to responding to your statement....

 

Understood about the duplicate postings....but according to that thread, it was done in the multiple countries areas to insure folks in each country saw it. The original poster was advised that threads meant for all areas should be in the "Geocaching topics" area. The original poster also apologized.

 

So if they are going to close duplicates...then close the threads in other listings and not the one in the area where the poster was advised it should be. So did TPTB close ALL threads on this topic in an effort to stiffle the dicsussion?

 

And the point I was originally attempting to make is....they closed that other discussion very quickly, but I see this one continuing without intervention..even though one could very easily perceive the OP as advertisement

 

My point is.....TPTB felt that duplicate post was a violation of gc.com policy and closed the thread very quickly to prevent further discussion. The OP on this thread seems to violate gc.com policy by being an advertisement for a "for profit" venture thinly disguised as an stating an "opinion" and essentially telling everyone that it was "tuff sh*t" if others didn't agree with him.

 

- GeoMike

The duplicate thread was not closed to "stifle discussion". It was closed so that the discussion could take place in the original thread. Opening duplicate threads about the same subject is considered "Spamming the forums". It's quite clear in the forum guidelines.

 

Please open a new thread if you'd like to discuss this further.

 

Back on topic:

Until Jerry weighs in on my (and others') comments in the Terracaching forums, we won't know why the article wasn't published. The most logical speculation suggests it wasn't re-written in time for the February issue. This problem can easily be fixed in the next 2-3 weeks before the deadline for the March issue approaches.

 

If the issue is that of bias, such as the article won't be included even with a rewrite, then I can imagine "for Geocachers everywhere" being replaced with something mentioning Geocaching.com

Edited by Team GPSaxophone
Link to comment

So it's a bit biased, it's your magazine! You can do whatever you want o do with it. Personally I enjoy reading it.

 

I belong to Geocaching.co m, and navicache. Guess what one I use?

 

If I really wanted to read an article on alternative cache website I could go and find one. I happen to enjoy gc.com, so do you. I see no problem with you supporting them.

 

 

Talk is cheap, if you were really worried about being biased, put in an article about the other websites, and leave it out of the forums!

Edited by Joe Smith
Link to comment
QUOTE 

At some point it just seems like you are doing nothing more than advertising your for profit magazine here. 

 

 

That is definitely what is seems like. Otherwise, why even bring it up in these forums.

 

So if it an be viewed as blatant advertisement...why isn't this topic closed and removed by TPTB? Hmmmm.....  Just 2 days ago...they closed a topic just because TPTB "felt" like the rules were broken.

 

- GeoMike

 

isn't it obvious? GC.com is a sponsor of TC.com. You won't see this thread closed any time soon. Just my observation and I don't care one way or the other. <_<

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...