Groundspeak "listing-service exclusivity on Mega-Events"

[caughtatwork]

Refer here:
http://forum.geocaching.com.au/viewtopi ... 25&t=17309

http://support.groundspeak.com//index.p ... age&id=308

6. Mega-Event Caches

Further, our publication of the Mega-Event cache provides exposure to millions of geocachers on Geocaching.com and through our weekly newsletter. In consideration of the significant resources we devote to publicizing the Mega-Event, we require listing-service exclusivity on all Mega-Events. We reserve the right to refuse to publish or to retract publication of any Mega-Event that includes as a sponsor a competing geocache listing service.

Fair enough, no GCA sponsorship of a Mega-Event. Sponsorship is not related just to cold, hard cash, so any sponsorship (including promotion or discussions) by a "competing geocache listing service" will also be forbidden I expect. To avoid any Mega-Event from being "delisted", I'm proposing that Geocaching Australia, including the site forums, will now ban, with extreme prejudice any and all references to Mega-Event activity. We will also remove any reference to a Mega-Event on any cache listing page, list of upcoming events, etc, etc.

This is a proposal, discuss away.

[Papa Bear_Left]

Apart from the (admittedly somewhat justified) sour grapes element, I don't think it's our call to proactively protect the organisers of Mega Events from our 'sponsorship'

Sure, there shouldn't be mention of GCA on the listing (same as any cache), but apart from that, I doubt that discussions on these forums would be considered as "sponsorship", even by the most rabid of GC lawyers.

Just to be safe, though, let's not utilise any of our funds to sponsor any Mega Events listed on any other site. Let's wait until the GCA Giga-Event series kicks off and support that instead!

[CraigRat]

I'm happy for forum discussions, that's the community talking not us, and with that I have no issues.

But things like promotion via the mail out (which we did as a favour for the Albury committee this march) and any prominence on the cache lists, no way. Sorry, screw em.

[CraigRat]

Promotion of Mega Events in the dashboards has been removed.

[caughtatwork]

I'm happy for forum discussions, that's the community talking not us, and with that I have no issues..

I'm not. GCA provides the forums and the funding for the forums comes from shop sales. That's sponsorship. As we are a competing listing service, we can't be seen to be sponsoring anything to do with Mega-Events, hence my public proposal to see what the community think.

[CraigRat]

Ok, let me clarify:

I'm happy for general members to mention 'wheres the next mega going to be' or 'whos going' but updates etc from the comittees advertising links to sites we cannot be named on, sure, on principle we treat them the same as geoshop owners etc.

That's be as fair as we can be I'd think.

[LouiseAnn]

Might it be worth asking ground speak if they would have a problem? Cos after all, they are the ones that will pull the event if they do. Then there is no room for argument/discussion. It's either ok from their point of view or not

[CraigRat]

Might it be worth asking ground speak if they would have a problem? Cos after all, they are the ones that will pull the event if they do. Then there is no room for argument/discussion. It's either ok from their point of view or not

They say there is to be no mention of other listing sites on a Mega's site or listing page, I think that pretty well states their position.

[Big Matt and Shell]

Might it be worth asking ground speak if they would have a problem? Cos after all, they are the ones that will pull the event if they do. Then there is no room for argument/discussion. It's either ok from their point of view or not

They say there is to be no mention of other listing sites on a Mega's site or listing page, I think that pretty well states their position.

So what does that have to do with GCA having a forums thread?

I originally replied to this thread but used the wrong account. My comment was along the lines of I think what GC are trying to do is stop other listing services being sponsors of a Mega. Doesn't make much sense to have Garmincaching a sponsor of a GC event. To have a competitors logo plastered all over the listing comes back to the Coke and Pepsi conversation we had a few weeks ago.

GC has shown that they can not control all the interweb with the Geospoilers incident. I personally wouldn't think it would be a problem having forums threads about a Mega, but I have been wrong before.

I think to take the approach of removing features from GCA is silly but it is c@w and Craigrats site to do as they see fit.

[CraigRat]

but it is c@w and Craigrats site to do as they see fit.

No it isn't

Look, if you can come up with a convincing reasons as to why we should give any prominence to a Mega event on this site I would like to hear it, without using the words 'community' as your employers have shown that it's not about that.

[CraigRat]

So what does that have to do with GCA having a forums thread?

As I said, I have no issue with general members discussing anything Mega related, I am simply proposing we just shouldn't allow MEGA organisers to post on behalf of the event, and to be treated as essentially a commercial vendor.

This would then give GC the exclusive platform for promoting their mega events, which appears to be what they want.

[caughtatwork]

take the approach of removing features from GCA is silly but it is c@w and Craigrats site to do as they see fit.

No it isn't

No, it isn't. That's why there is a discussion.

[caughtatwork]

Sponsorship is not cash. It's anything to do with the promotion of an activity. They don't want any other listing service sponsoring a Mega-Event, then GCA will stop referring to Mega-Events. It's what they want, I think we should do it to avoid peoples Mega-Events being "delisted".

[Big Matt and Shell]

take the approach of removing features from GCA is silly but it is c@w and Craigrats site to do as they see fit.

No it isn't

No it isn't silly?

I think the best thing to do is to check what Groundspeaks' requirements are before making any rash decisions. I know just the bloke to do it too!

[CraigRat]

I didn't cut the quiote quite right, I was referring to

but it is c@w and Craigrats site to do as they see fit.

I amended it and added to my statement above, but not quick enough!