Terrachacing upsetting gc.com?

Aushiker · Post by **Aushiker** » 01 February 05 3:44 pm

Hi

For those amused by such things, this forum on the secondary forums might intrigue .... What The Today's Cacher Thread Was All About?, I just don't get it. Seems that TC is a touchy subject at the moment.

Andrew

Lt. Sniper · Post by **Lt. Sniper** » 01 February 05 5:04 pm

LOL, that thread got bitch slapped off the face of the earth as well.

Mmmm...

Aushiker · Post by **Aushiker** » 01 February 05 5:18 pm

Lt. Sniper wrote:LOL, that thread got bitch slapped off the face of the earth as well.

Yep, which is why it caught my attention and the words legal action ... anyone else have background?

Seems that Jeremy is a touchy little boy or does he have reason?

Andrew

dcr · Post by **dcr** » 01 February 05 5:56 pm

For those who wan't a bit of an overview, read on otherwise this is another storm in a teacup

Let us call it TC vs TC w GC

A bit of a summary from both of the forums;

1.) Today's Cacher [1] in the January editon ran some articles on non-GC.com sites such as MovingCache [2]

2.) Today's Cacher (the Magazine) had been discussing an article on TerraCaching in the TerraCaching forum. There was some to and fro and some editing; the article didn't meet the deadline. [3]

3.) El_Diablo as the editor for Today's Cacher said that he wouldn't run the article but hedges that it was due to other reasons. The debate spreads into the GC.com forums as well. [4]

4.) After some hedging El_Diablo says that the article couldn't be run due to legal issues between TerraCaching.com and Geocaching.com.
"This magazine will not be caught in the middle of a legal battle'. There is also some valid discussion regarding the tone of the article sounding like an advert doe to the number of time the site is mentioned in the article.

5.) After more discussion this seems to stem from TC.com using a modified version of the GC.com 'Terms of Service' [3]

6.) The discussion changed into an "Editorially bound to your sponsors opinion(s)" discussion. Especially with respect to the magazine tagline "...for geocachers everywhere".

7.) The discussion turned into a "GC.com vs the world" and "GC.com *is* Geocaching" argument [4]. As we know if you weigh into these you never get the hours wasted added back onto your life.

8.) The article is posted elsewhere [5]

9.) A different style of article is proposed focusing on the "Nude Cacher locationless cache" because that will get peoples interest

We'll just have to see if Snoogan's article is in the March edition.

cheers Darren

============================
[1.] Today's Cacher (Magazine)
http://www.todayscacher.com/

[2.] MovingCache
http://www.movingcache.com/

[3.] Today's Cacher
http://www.terracaching.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=385

[4.] Today's Cacher, Biased?
http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index. ... opic=89759

[5.] GPS caching games
http://www.oconnellz.com/caching

EcoTeam · Post by **EcoTeam** » 01 February 05 6:23 pm

Oh boy!, lets do an indepth article on gc.com.au for the next newsletter shall we, this could be fun!

Oh, that's assuming there is a next newsletter

EcoDave

ideology · Post by **ideology** » 01 February 05 7:43 pm

actually, we contacted them and they were keen. we spoke to ecodave who was happy for us to submit some stuff from the previous newsletters if we got the original author's permission. then we got too involved in doing stuff on the site to take it forward...

but if anyone else wants to, be our guest!

ideology · Post by **ideology** » 01 February 05 8:03 pm

we just read through the thread on the secondary site

we think it's pretty sad that groundspeak could get an article pulled from today's cacher. it makes us even more determined to make this a fully operational cache listing site!

Cached · Post by **Cached** » 02 February 05 2:55 pm

they couldn't help having a dig at us though:

http://www.todayscacher.com/2005/feb/editorial.asp

Aushiker · Post by **Aushiker** » 02 February 05 3:00 pm

Not worth replying to IMO. Very disappointing comments in a forum with effectively no right of reply. Also not excactly factual.

Andrew

Team Red Devil · Post by **Team Red Devil** » 02 February 05 3:53 pm

They don't have the gumption to come in here and comment- they do it from afar. Hmmm...that sounds somewhat familiar (read: Typical). <br>
<br>
Marie

aussiecoder · Post by **aussiecoder** » 02 February 05 4:58 pm

Cached wrote:they couldn't help having a dig at us though:

http://www.todayscacher.com/2005/feb/editorial.asp

... And the yanks wonder why they are hated around the world.

Aushiker · Post by **Aushiker** » 02 February 05 5:08 pm

And there is more .... http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index. ... opic=90092

Andrew

Bronze · Post by **Bronze** » 02 February 05 8:01 pm

Sorry - Couldn't help myself

Bronze.

ideology · Post by **ideology** » 02 February 05 8:07 pm

that reminds us to get the buxley feed going!

ideology · Post by **ideology** » 02 February 05 8:50 pm

we just sent them the following:

The questioning of people's charitable ethics in your Tsunami editorial is ill-founded. There are many charity fund-raising events held every day and the ethics of people who participate at those events are never questioned. For example, there was recenly a large concert for the Tsunami victims here: noone questioned the ethics of the audience or the fact that singing had nothing to do with the Tsunami. In fact, people got behind it and raised a lot of money. By your logic, there would never be a charitable event or raffle!

Alternatively, if people had poor charitable ethics and were just wanting a smiley, that's fine: the smileys cost nothing to make and the money raised goes to the Tsunami victims. Surely you can't be advocating stopping a way to raise money for the victims because you question people's ethics!

We agree that people should get out and try to help, but we disagree that potential methods of raising money were stopped due to inflexible policies and questioning people's ethics.