 |
opencaching.com
Geocaching by the community, for the community
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
hmarq
Site Admin
Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Posts: 351
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2003 8:31 pm Post subject: Interesting gc.com thread |
 |
|
New site obstacles
I suspect most anyone reading here already reads the gc.com boards, but in case you don't ... it's an interesting read. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Renegade Knight
Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Posts: 151
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 12:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| It was a good read. I've contacted him to see if he's ready and willing to follow through. If not then thats potential help. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ju66l3r
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I have checked back in here on occasion. Don't worry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ju66l3r
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| So, as you can see by that post, it seems that getting the database populated might be a bit of a problem. Even if we provide all of the coolest tools in the world, getting a hider to do anything here will be nearly impossible....Any ideas? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scout
Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 235
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ju66l3r wrote: | | So, as you can see by that post, it seems that getting the database populated might be a bit of a problem. Even if we provide all of the coolest tools in the world, getting a hider to do anything here will be nearly impossible....Any ideas? |
There's even stronger evidence on alt.rec.geocaching. A poster named "ex geocacher" posted a long rant, really long, about how evil a gc.com approver is, then threatened, "I will never post a log on gc.com again, just the cache itself." If even this guy is still stuck on gc.com that bad, you can bet that the majority of gc.com's customers are generally satisfied and can't be dynamited off that site.
So, what to do? I've said it before. Don't compete directly with gc.com. They service their customer base well enough to keep it. Instead, find the niches that gc.com doesn't want to serve and feature those. Virtual caches, locationless caches, cache density, etc. You can still list traditional physical caches, but don't put your emphasis there.
_________________
Scout http://GPSgames.org
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ju66l3r
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree that those should be one of the reasons to come here...but even the finders will not be that interested. Most responses I got were "i'm too lazy to repost" and they weren't even thinking about maintaining their pages at the time.
They just don't want to have to go to 2 places. This is why you do have to compete on some level with GC.com otherwise you get relegated to being a service for the few exceptions to GC's rules.
I'm not sure there's really that much draw in that. That's why I say something like premium offerings for free will be a good undercutting.
PS - Unrelatedly, anyone know exactly how Buxley keeps his site updated? I know he got sued at one point, but I can't imagine he's spidering their entire data set under their noses to keep things updated daily... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CoyoteRed
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Posts: 220
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think Buxley's is really all that up to date. He has a lot of archived caches on it still.
Back to the issue at hand, awareness is the biggest issue.
Encourage everyone who posts a cache here that already has caches on GC.com put a link on their gc.com caches to a list of their caches here.
Which means that there needs to be a URL to list the caches owned by one particular person.
That will get awareness.
Next, when they see their caches don't need "approving" and it is online instantly, that's a draw.
I think the basic concepts being talked about here WILL be a draw.
"Post what you want, but please post responsibly!" or something to that effect.
CR
~I wonder how letterboxing survived all these years without proximity limits, approvers, and a host of other regulations that cachers "enjoy?"~
_________________
"...been know to miss the finer points." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cezanne
Joined: 01 Oct 2003
Posts: 58
Location: Graz, Austria
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ju66l3r wrote: | | So, as you can see by that post, it seems that getting the database populated might be a bit of a problem. Even if we provide all of the coolest tools in the world, getting a hider to do anything here will be nearly impossible....Any ideas? |
I guess that ''nearly impossible'' is too strong. I agree with Scout that many geocachers using gc.com are rather satisfied with their service, but on the other hand it is perhaps not the best idea to ask the questions you asked at a gc.om discussion board. The degree of satisfaction with gc.com varies throughout the world. For example, in Germany there are many geocachers that are not happy with gc.com and there is a relatively high degree of caches that are available also at nc.com although the support and service of nc.com is not that impressive.
I am following a subset of the English language forums of gc.com only sporadically, but I noticed that most of the posters there are from the US and form only a small subset of the set of active cachers. Asking the type of questions you asked at gc.com will leave you with a skewed impression.
I came across your questions, but I would never consider to post my answers (of the yes type) in the forum of gc.com.
What is true, however, is that many people do not like to visit several sites. This does not only hold as cache data bases are regarded, but also as additional services are regarded. (Take for example, the sites which allow the cache owners to generate some html code they could add to their caches to provide additional information about their caches, such as the handicapped accessibility guide or other services of that type).
Personally, I am taking the trouble of offering my caches both at gc.com and nc.com, but the interface at nc.com is of a type that it is really a pain for me using that data base. If a new system showed up with a reasonable support (minimum requirement: allowing simple html files that display in the standard way and not as on nc.com) , I would switch over from nc.com to that new system and offer my caches at gc.com and the new system.
In my opinion, one of the chances of a new system would also be to be less centred around the geocaching world in the US. The situation in Europe, for example, is quite different. Many of the restrictions that gc.com put up over the months are motivated by problems that arose in the US, take for example the problems with vacation caches in Hawai, with caches in national parks, with burried caches etc
I know quite a number of cachers who have problems in understanding why the same set of rules should apply to each country regardless of the local situation.
Multilinguality is also in issue in Europe which does hardly arise in the US.
Cezanne |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cezanne
Joined: 01 Oct 2003
Posts: 58
Location: Graz, Austria
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Scout wrote: |
..... then threatened, "I will never post a log on gc.com again, just the cache itself." If even this guy is still stuck on gc.com that bad, you can bet that the majority of gc.com's customers are generally satisfied and can't be dynamited off that site.
|
It seems to me that you ignore here the fact that typically a hider of a cache would like to assure that at least some cachers are setting out for his/her cache. I put a lot of effort in my caches which I would not do if I knew in advance that they will have one finder in a whole year in the optimistic case.
I was angry about gc.com several times in the last months (however, even more angry about nc.com to be honest), but still I would never stop listing my caches at gc.com simply because it seems ridiculous to me to list caches that are almost never searched for.
| Quote: |
So, what to do? I've said it before. Don't compete directly with gc.com. They service their customer base well enough to keep it. Instead, find the niches that gc.com doesn't want to serve and feature those. Virtual caches, locationless caches, cache density, etc. You can still list traditional physical caches, but don't put your emphasis there. |
I do not agree. Certainly, niches are an important issue, but if virtuals regardless of their quality and their type become the main offer of the new system, it will not be any longer attractive for cachers like myself that are willing to support a competitor of gc.com due to a dislike of monopolies.
Cezanne |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CoyoteRed
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Posts: 220
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There will be a filtering system that will take into account the "quality" of the cache as people find it. Those caches that people don't like will fall lower on the list.
This has the advantages of getting your cache out immediately and as folks place caches they get a feel of how others like their ideas. Bad ideas get filtered out while popular ideas increase.
It's a win, win situation.
CR
_________________
"...been know to miss the finer points." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cezanne
Joined: 01 Oct 2003
Posts: 58
Location: Graz, Austria
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CoyoteRed wrote: | There will be a filtering system that will take into account the "quality" of the cache as people find it. Those caches that people don't like will fall lower on the list.
|
Yes, I am aware of the filtering discussions. We will have to see how this works out, in particular if appropriate filters will be provided to those who are not willing or able to provide their own.
My main point was, however, a different one. I do not think that it is good idea to have as main target to attract those caches that would never get listed at gc.com. This will create a bad image for the new system among more conservative cachers.
Cezanne |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scout
Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 235
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cezanne wrote: | | Certainly, niches are an important issue, but if virtuals regardless of their quality and their type become the main offer of the new system, it will not be any longer attractive for cachers like myself that are willing to support a competitor of gc.com due to a dislike of monopolies. |
I didn't say virtuals regardless of their quality. If you don't like virtuals, don't hunt them. If you don't like lame virtuals, don't hunt them. A well-implemented opencaching system will offer you that choice.
_________________
Scout http://GPSgames.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scout
Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Posts: 235
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cezanne wrote: | | This will create a bad image for the new system among more conservative cachers. |
If by conservative cachers, you mean those that like gc.com censorship, you won't get those anyway. You're better off getting the business gc.com turns away. Then, geocachers wanting a fuller experience will go to opencaching.com. They say they don't want to use two sites, but they'll have to as gc.com is not a full service provider.
_________________
Scout http://GPSgames.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cezanne
Joined: 01 Oct 2003
Posts: 58
Location: Graz, Austria
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Scout wrote: | | cezanne wrote: | | This will create a bad image for the new system among more conservative cachers. |
If by conservative cachers, you mean those that like gc.com censorship,
|
No, I meant something different.
| Quote: |
You won't get those anyway. You're better off getting the business gc.com turns away. Then, geocachers wanting a fuller experience will go to opencaching.com. They say they don't want to use two sites, but they'll have to as gc.com is not a full service provider. |
I agree only to some extent. I am also convinced that opencaching.com needs to have offers to those who are currently turned away from gc.com for whatever reason. I still believe, however, that there are quite a number of cachers who are potentially interesting into opencaching, but would get turned away if at the opencaching site a large number of items appear which have no connection to caching whatever. For me this is not only a question of being able to filter those out, but also one of the image of the site to the outside. (Put in a drastic setting, I would, for example, feel quite annoyed by a web site of a hiking assocation or an environmental organization which devotes some part of its content to forbidden tours with ATVs through the forest.)
Cezanne |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CoyoteRed
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Posts: 220
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2003 7:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think we're talking about allowing illegal or immoral caches.
If someone puts a cache on active tracks, the locals shouls contact them and let them know it's a no-no.
See we're talking about going againt the grain of geocaching. We're talking expanding it. Anything that is extension of finding something outside your house is fair game. The default filters will give people things like what they see at gc.com.
If some jerk likes putting caches on tracks or next to a military installation fence, then not only do we have the ability to filter those caches, but to filter him as well.
Personally, easily getting my cache listed and getting my cache visited are the two main reasons I'd use a listing service.
One thing that's going to be hard to do is break the paradigm of the way gc.com does it. We're going to have to write an introduction to opencaching so people will understand. Let them understand about finder-based approval, instant listing, filtering. Plus, mainly, it not about just getting around gc.com rules, it's about freedom to cache as you see fit. It's not about rogue caching, it's FUGBUG! (I like that ju66ler!)
This will be a lot different that what people are used to.
CR
_________________
"...been know to miss the finer points." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.6 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search 
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
