Subscriber only caches...at first

[Mind Socket]

I think there are a fair few premium members in Aus now. Fortunately, none of them have taken enough drugs to think that member only caches are a good idea.

[hoping I'm not wrong]

- Rog

[Bronze]

I like onions.

The Bronze.

[Team Stargazer]

I've voted: NO

I've been looking at premium membership but unless you've got some sort of electronic device (apart from your GPSr) with you while your out caching (Ipac, Palm or even a laptop) which I don't (currently), I don't see much benefit in premium membership towards my caching atm.

... apart from giving financial support to geocache.com that is.

And like Denvar said:

Why would I place a cache that the average user would never see?

[Slider & Smurf]

The concept of 'premium membership' appeared not long after we started caching, and at the time we couldn't see much use for it - the only benefit appeared to be visibility of 'members only' caches.
<p>We then got hooked on electronic cache hunting tools like autocache and cachemonkey ... when these finally fell over after one database change too many, we finally found a reason to sign up as premium members - gpx files!!!
<p>The only reason I can think of to use 'member only' caches is to discourage widespread pillaging - twisted folks who aren't happy unless they're spoiling someone else's fun. This works on the assumption that the individuals bent on spoiling everyone else's fun can't be bothered stumping up for the membership fee.
<p>Apart from that option, the whole concept of 'member only' caches seems to go against the grain ...

[C.A.S.]

We became Premium Members for a couple or reason
<ul><li> For the little that it costs (less than most magazine subscriptions) its a great service and we are getting great family time together (better than sitting at home doing nothing). Also when you subscribe and renew each year, your fee is the same as when you first joined (just hope it doesn't go down)
<li>I had been downloading the loc files for use in the demo of OziExplorer but found it time consuming. PM give you access to gpx files which is saving me time. I've also purchased the full version of OziExplorer and the NatMap Raster Mapsheets. These together with GSAK these makes it sooooooo easy keeping track of which caches you've done and planning for the next cache outing. We don't have a PDA/PocketPC but we are certainly getting the benefit of PM.</ul>

By the way, I see no reason why a cache should be marked for PM only other than for GC.com to provide a special cache event for PM's to say "thankyou" for the financial support.<BR><BR>

TimTam

[EcoTeam]

Maybe only Premium Members should be allowed to place caches After all its GC.com who are providing the service to the cache placer of hosting their cache

That's not geocaching, and I'd take my hobby elsewhere. The idea of a users pays system like Loon's idea would be interesting, and probably controversial. For one thing, it would have to go hand in hand with a decentralised community based approach, since everyone will effectively claim the right to have their paying voice heard.

Another idea springs to mind ... there is no GC.com or equivalent, and everything works based on a peer2peer network. Each cacher has their cache pages on their own bit of the web at their expense, and the data is all interlinked. It would effectively be a more structured and networked extension of each cacher's personal web site as hosted on gc.com.au. The load is then shared between users. I believe that a reaaally good system (beyond your wildest imagination) like this is possible.

- R

Nice idea, but probably the majority of cachers out there:
a) Don't have their own web page
b) Don't know anything about such things
c) Don't want the hassle of learning and maintaining such a system

Without putting too much thought into it, I actually prefer a centralised system. In this case the site is either up or it it's down, and it's all in one place, so you know you are getting every single cache listed etc
A decentralised system relies on every single different private web server to be up 24/7, and there is never any guarantee that you have a complete list of caches etc.

EcoDave

[EcoTeam]

I agree with everyone else, premium caches just won't work. As it is, a good cache in Sydney is lucky to get 20-30 visits in a few years, a premium cache would be lucky to get 1, so what would be the point of placing it?

As for the eternal GC.com argument, like it or not, that's the way it will always be. Unless you take up Rogers peer2peer idea, geocaching will always be ultimately controlled by the person who owns the domain name, and even in the case of peer2peer, someone has to write and maintain a program to control it.
We all rely on the common sense of the "powers that be" to keep things going. Keep your fingers crossed it just all holds together...

If gc.com did go crazy and started charging for access, everyone would flock elesewhere. There would be no shortage of people who would quickly set up an alternative. But then does the cycle start again?

EcoDave

[Mind Socket]

that's the way it will always be

*sigh* No wonder things are so screwed up in the western world.

My p2p idea is just that, an idea. It is possible with little effort to account for all the problems mentioned.

As for there being a cycle, the problems with gc.com are purely political, and I'm confident that the next big thing in geocaching will have nothing to do with them and will dilute the power that people blindly _assign_ to others.

- R

[swampgecko]

Hang on a minute, this thread has steered away from my orginal post, the debate is about if we should have Member only caches UNTIL they have been found by a paid up member of geocaching.com, at which time they are then converted to "open to ALL" geocachers. NOT should we have "full time members only caches"

ECOTEAM

a premium cache would be lucky to get 1, so what would be the point of placing it?

The first finder would have to be a premium member, that is the whole point


The idea appeals to me, Why? It just seems like a good idea. As a reward in itself for supporting the site as a financial member.

If people choose not to be a financial member of gc.com they don't have to be, that is their choice, but as can be seen by the forum that I put the link up for, some geocachers believe that that fact may not entitle you to a first find.

[Mind Socket]

And some geocachers believe that some geocachers have completely lost sight of the point of geocaching (I'm not talking about you, Swampy).

I'll say it again, but another way, and then I'm outta here ... IMHO, anything that restricts or lets someone else restrict the way in which I can place or find a cache (financial member of some website or otherwise) is a Bad Thing. The principle is horribly flawed. There are better ways to reward financial members, not at the forced expense of non-financial members.

Apologies for going off topic.

-forum timeout-

[EcoTeam]

And some geocachers believe that some geocachers have completely lost sight of the point of geocaching (I'm not talking about you, Swampy).

I'll say it again, but another way, and then I'm outta here ... IMHO, anything that restricts or lets someone else restrict the way in which I can place or find a cache (financial member of some website or otherwise) is a Bad Thing. The principle is horribly flawed. There are better ways to reward financial members, not at the forced expense of non-financial members.

Apologies for going off topic.

-forum timeout-

I agree with Roger.
EVERY cache should be free at all times, anything else is a definitely a bad thing and WILL force people away from the sport or they will find another way to play.
Financial members already get the main benefit they pay for, i.e. GPX downloads. Politics and policies aside, the current system is working well, all caches are free, and if you want the benefits of GPX files then you pay a small price for it. The whole idea of "premium caches" should be given the flick IMHO.

EcoDave

[swampgecko]

I did say that it seems like a good idea and yes that I like it.
That doesn't mean that I will be implimenting it. I just wanted feedback about the concept, for which I thank you.

Whether or not it catches on here will remain to be seen.

[Bronze]

When I eventually have a laptop I will become a premium member but until that time I'm quite happy just bungleing around in the bush.

Premium caches - boot that idea in the arse I reckon.

The Bronze.

[EcoTeam]

that's the way it will always be

*sigh* No wonder things are so screwed up in the western world.

My p2p idea is just that, an idea. It is possible with little effort to account for all the problems mentioned.

As for there being a cycle, the problems with gc.com are purely political, and I'm confident that the next big thing in geocaching will have nothing to do with them and will dilute the power that people blindly _assign_ to others.

- R

I meant it will always be that way for the foreseable future. GC.com has reached a critical mass, and there simply is no alternative on the horizon. When new people want to try geocaching, where are they going to go other than geocaching.com?

I just can't see any "next big thing" happening without gc.com.

gc.com is just so incredilbly successful, and it works so well (aside form the political things as you mention), that I can't see anything else coming along unless:
a) Jeremy flicks the OFF switch on gc.com for some reason (and he certainly has the power to do so if he chooses )
b) gc.com do something incredibly stupid that infuriates the majority of cachers around the world (like paying before you can play?)
c) A new idea is so compellingly different that it makes gc.com completely obsolete over night. I personally can't see this happening unless a) or b) happens first in some way, but hey, you never know what is over the horizon.

If anything new comes along and it looks like it will work better than gc.com, I'll be the first to support it.

I feel your pain Rog!

Speaking of "the next big thing", anyone willing to hazard a guess as to what that might be?

EcoDave

[SNIFTER]

Some of you are either incredibly blind or nieve to think that this is the only place to play this game. There are several other sites that cater for caching.

Appologies for my poor choice of words earlier, I love you all. Really.