I've been reading over alot of the FAQ and other info in the website and believe that there is more to the system that keeping "points".

I'm still too new to give a good evaluation of the system, but I'd say don't rule it out by "rumor" of how it works.
There are now at least 3 or 4 of us from GGA in the system and you can probably get sponsorship from us to evaluate it for yourself. Heck it's free so why not?

Kenneth

quote:

Originally posted by MariettaGecko:
See, my only issue is that if you played your cards right, you could beat the system.

1. Set up a newbie account. get sponsors and become active.
2. Set up another newbie account, use your first account to be one of the sponsors of the second. Once they are in, kick out one of the sponsors of the first, and replace with the second.
3. Set up a third account. Have this account sponsored by the other two, and have it sponsor both of those accounts.

You have just beat their system.

This does assume that their system allows recursive sponsoring.

No, it doesn't allow circular or recursive sponsoring.

If I sponsor you, and you or I withdraw (one aspect we like is that both sponsors and sponsorees are perfectly free to switch at any time...), then you cannot sponsor me.

There are a few 'sock puppet' accounts, but so what? If someone wants to lie and cheat, then that's their problem -- they have to sleep at night and face it in the mirror the next day!

Of course, people can and do set up fake accounts on GC as well, to rack up FTFs, or just to add to their smiley-count.

Terracaching is a little more sophisticated than that, and they generally follow the same guidelines and rules for where and how to set up caches. In general, it is a 'quality vs quantity' priority.

quote:

Originally posted by kennethpruett:
I don't think those who "beat their system" are doing anything great.
If you then list caches (of course you can approve yourself if you sponsored yourself) and the caches are illegal or just generally stink, people will rate them badly and they will get archived.

I believe the sponsor system has two goals.
1) to make it harder to gain anonymous access to the system
2) encourage accountability amoung cachers who don't try to go around goal 1.

Just a guess, but I bet they have ways of finding sock puppet accounts.
Scripts that check logs for login to multiple accounts from the same IP address would not be hard to write.

Kenneth

Yes, they do have such ways... Most people underestimate the power of an ISP admin... or else they overestimate security on mail browsers!

We continue to be involved with GC, primarily for some of the 'fringe' kind of caches -- like letterboxes, and the Earth caches like the Stone Door one we did with the Wanna Go group last week!

We are also involved with TC. It's not an either/or situation. The opportunity to rate and review caches on a true scale instead of just 'Found It' or DNF appeals to us, as does the peer input.

It's very much a work in progress, so it costs nothing to observe, participate at our convenience and see what happens.

quote:

The opportunity to rate and review caches on a true scale instead of just 'Found It' or DNF appeals to us, as does the peer input.

Then wait'll you see the new "solution" for locationless and virtual "caches". I saw a demo a few days ago and it was cool. I've been sworn to secrecy though.

~erik~

quote:

Originally posted by ~erik~:

quote:

The opportunity to rate and review caches on a true scale instead of just 'Found It' or DNF appeals to us, as does the peer input.

Then wait'll you see the new "solution" for locationless and virtual "caches". I saw a demo a few days ago and it was cool. I've been sworn to secrecy though.

~erik~

So unless gc.com plans on moving the traditionals over to the new system then I can use Terracaching for traditionals and geocaching.com for virts.

Ken

quote:

Originally posted by kennethpruett:

quote:

Originally posted by ~erik~:

quote:

The opportunity to rate and review caches on a true scale instead of just 'Found It' or DNF appeals to us, as does the peer input.

Then wait'll you see the new "solution" for locationless and virtual "caches". I saw a demo a few days ago and it was cool. I've been sworn to secrecy though.

~erik~

So unless gc.com plans on moving the traditionals over to the new system then I can use Terracaching for traditionals and geocaching.com for virts.

Ken

People have to find the cache to rate it. So far what I hear about this "elite" site is that it stinks. One guy combined his nearest terracaches for like 50 miles (all four of them) and got a total hiking distance of just under 400 feet combined.

If you want people finding your caches I would recommend sticking with GC.com. It gets less traffic than navitrashe at this point.

quote:

Originally posted by mtn-man:

quote:

Originally posted by kennethpruett:
So unless gc.com plans on moving the traditionals over to the new system then I can use Terracaching for traditionals and geocaching.com for virts.

Ken

People have to find the cache to rate it. So far what I hear about this "elite" site is that it stinks. One guy combined his nearest terracaches for like 50 miles (all four of them) and got a total hiking distance of just under 400 feet combined.

If you want people finding your caches I would recommend sticking with GC.com. It gets less traffic than navitrashe at this point.

Actually you can rate a cache by your first impression (although I believe it does not weigh as much as a rating by a finder).
Depends on where that guy lived and how good the placers were in his area.
I done caches that I walked 20 feet and were great and ones that I've walked/hiked a mile and sucked.
Distance isn't my only criteria for great caches.
I expect some lamers to show up in Terracache just like gc.com and navicache.

As far as getting less finds and the site getting less traffic, that would be the same for any site starting out. I guess we will just have to wait and see.

I think it has already been mentioned that all three sites will meet certain needs for different cachers.

Kenneth

Edited for spelling error: I never did retain the i before e stuff from school.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: reepicheep,

quote:

Originally posted by kennethpruett:
I expect some lamers to show up in Terracache just like gc.com and navicache.

Yes, but the original point of the site and its exclusive (and not inclusive) nature was to specifically weed out the lame caches in favor of higher quality caches. Exclusivity seems to be shooting them in the foot. I climbed right past one this past weekend and had no desire to look for it since I am not in their "exclusive club". I chose to log the GC.com cache, which was less than 528 feet away, has been there much longer and is open to everyone to find and log.

quote:

Originally posted by mtn-man:
I climbed right past one this past weekend and had no desire to look for it since I am not in their "exclusive club". I chose to log the GC.com cache, which was less than 528 feet away, has been there much longer and is open to everyone to find and log.

A couple of questions
1. Not being a member of the "exclusive club", how did you know it was there?
2. Since you mentioned the gc.com cache "is open to everyone to find and log" does that mean you don't like Gc.com members only geocaches?

By the way Ken, I don't care if you play the game any way you want. It is up to you. If you want to list caches on all three sites that is mighty fine. Just expect less traffic on the other two.

Allen, to answer your questions:

1. A couple of the people in our hiking group of about 15 are members of that site. They logged it. They also play the game the way they want to. So do I. Some folks choose not to do caches inside of I-285 for example. Some don't do virtual caches. I do almost any cache anywhere that is listed on the GC.com site, but I rarely do locationless caches. It is a game so you can play any way you want to.


2. I totally understand and support the reasons for Members Only Caches (MOCs).

a. Giving people who support the GC.com site financially something special to hunt that non-supportive cacher cannot see.

b. Using MOCs as a way to put higher end, more expensive trade items out there that are available to a smaller group of cacher, which also financially support the web site.

c. Limiting traffic to a geocache location by reducing the number of potential geocachers that can see the geocache page and hence limiting the impact on the area.

d. Using MOCs as a way to hide your caches from cache bandit and thieves who generally are too cheap to pay the extra money to have the ability to see MOCs.

Individual cachers are the ones who decided upon whether or not their particular cache is a MOC, not the GC.com web site. Most of the site's services are free to use and will remain that way. All you have to do to see MOCs is pay $3.00 a month or $30.00 a year. I think that people that pay to support the site deserve extra perks and the site provides them to cachers (I would pay $3.00 for pocket queries alone frankly, the rest is just gravy). You are free to decide if those perks are worth your $3.00 and you can still use most of the site freely if you choose not to pay.

To see *any* Terracache you have to go through the web site's mandated sponsorship procedure, which may be revoked on the whim of the site and/or your sponsors (and that has happened).

There is a huge difference there.

I found it a few days ago and signed, got 2 sponsors very quickly, then saw how little traffice & caches there were from Georgia. I will watch the site for a while, until my sponsors pull ne for lack of activity. ( I did do one locationless find, just to get in the system.) IMHO, if it grows, great. If not, I'm still gonna cache something.

Oh I have no problem with MOC's. I have found several, but not had a reason to hide one yet. It just that the phrase "is open to everyone to find and log" caught my eye because not all gc.com geocaches are open for everyone and so I was curious.

As for cost, I became a supporting member of GC.com when there were no extra perks, because I thought I got $30 worth of fun each year as it was. So all the subscriber perks are gravy to me.

quote:

Originally posted by mtn-man:
By the way Ken, I don't care if you play the game any way you want. It is up to you. If you want to list caches on all three sites that is mighty fine. Just expect less traffic on the other two.

Great! I may list some on both sites.
I usually get less traffic on some of my caches anyway since I live far NorthEast of Atlanta.
But from the traffic I have gotten, the cachers usually like the quality of work I put into them and to me a single log each month with comments like What a great spot for a cache. Really enjoyed visiting this spot. TNLNSL. Many thanks for placing one of the best micro around. and I won't give anything away, but this is a MUST DO cache is better than 50 "quick grab, number x of x, thanks".
Again, both serve their purposes, just showing I don't mind less traffic.

quote:

2. I totally understand and support the reasons for Members Only Caches (MOCs).

<snip>

To see *any* Terracache you have to go through the web site's mandated sponsorship procedure, which may be revoked on the whim of the site and/or your sponsors (and that has happened).

There is a huge difference there.

No doubt you could have your sponsorship revoked, but if you didn't do anything bad to get it revoked, I'm sure someone will pick you up again quickly...especially if you have high ratings on caches placed. gridlox said his was revoked and he got offers right away.

mtn-man, I'm a little confused.
You support MOCs on gc.com and give a list of reasons why you like them, but then seem to put down Terracaching for setting up there system to pretty much do the same thing but for all their caches.

Kenneth

quote:

Originally posted by AllenLacy:
As for cost, I became a supporting member of GC.com when there were no extra perks, because I thought I got $30 worth of fun each year as it was. So all the subscriber perks are gravy to me.

Yeah, really and truly I feel the same way. I have been offered a complimentary membership each year for the volunteer work I do as a reviewer. I still pay each year. One thing Hydee did do was make the puppymonster a Premium Member for kicks last year. LOL!

quote:

Originally posted by kennethpruett:

quote:

Originally posted by mtn-man:
By the way Ken, I don't care if you play the game any way you want. It is up to you. If you want to list caches on all three sites that is mighty fine. Just expect less traffic on the other two.

Great! I may list some on both sites.

One of the rules for Terracaching.com states that caches on Terracaching cannot be listed on other sites. If you do that, you will be in violation of their rules. Section C of their mission statement says, "To provide the community with a unique list of caches, not listed elsewhere, that meet the community's high standards of quality."

quote:

mtn-man, I'm a little confused.
You support MOCs on gc.com and give a list of reasons why you like them, but then seem to put down Terracaching for setting up there system to pretty much do the same thing but for all their caches.

The Terracaching format is not even remotely the same. You can see almost all of the caches on GC.com and you don't even have to be logged in to see them. Please note that the first line of the Terracaching site says, "TerraCaching.com is a community of cachers and a listing of TerraCaches hidden, with a little help from handheld Global Positioning System receivers and available exclusively to TerraCaching.com members." Even they admit on their own site that they are an exclusive site for their members only. I like the fact that Jeremy continues to pledge that you can use most of his site for free and thinks that is the way it should be (and Navicache seems to feel the same way). I just don't like the whimsical nature of the exclusive club that Terracaching has created. I could not visit the GC.com site for years and can come back and pick up right where I left off with no problems.

quote:

Originally posted by mtn-man:
...you have to go through the web site's mandated sponsorship procedure, which may be revoked on the whim of the site and/or your sponsors...

With Kenneth's outspoken approach in blogging and logging, I don't imagine he'll be a TC member too long.

quote:

Originally posted by mtn-man:

quote:

Originally posted by kennethpruett:
Great! I may list some on both sites.

One of the rules for Terracaching.com states that caches on Terracaching cannot be listed on other sites. If you do that, you will be in violation of their rules. Section C of their mission statement says, "To provide the community with a unique list of caches, not listed elsewhere, that meet the community's high standards of quality."

But in their forums/faqs they say that approval of such caches is up to your approvers and if they do not have a problem with it, then it can stay.
I think their rules are more like guidelines.
They do say that co-listed caches usually get lower ratings in the system and discourage it.

quote:

available exclusively to TerraCaching.com members[/i]." Even they admit on their own site that they are an exclusive site for their members only.

I concede on the exclusive of the site.
Of course it seems getting access is no problem and I don't know anyone denied sponsorship.
I see it more as a verification process and a way to decentralize who has authority to kick out abusers and lurkers.

quote:

I like the fact that Jeremy continues to pledge that you can use most of his site for free and thinks that is the way it should be (and Navicache seems to feel the same way). I just don't like the whimsical nature of the exclusive club that Terracaching has created. I could not visit the GC.com site for years and can come back and pick up right where I left off with no problems.

So far everything I've done on Terraching.com is free.
They are offering 'premium' memberships with perks, the same as gc.com.

I can see where some will not like the fact you have to have sponsors and the 'elite' feeling of the site, but so far I have not felt any such eliteness.
However, I am new to the site and reserve the right to change my mind later.

This is definitely a good discussion and I hope it will continue on with explanations of the differences and likenesses of the listing sites.
To me, choices are good.

Kenneth

quote:

Originally posted by Love GC.com:

quote:

Originally posted by mtn-man:
...you have to go through the web site's mandated sponsorship procedure, which may be revoked on the whim of the site and/or your sponsors...

With Kenneth's outspoken approach in blogging and logging, I don't imagine he'll be a TC member too long.

Nice of you to show up with the unknown-comic-ish bag over you head to remain anonymous.

Maybe......but maybe my views/opinions might fit right in with some Terracachers.
At least one of my approvers is a GGAr and knows me pretty well and he hasn't revoked me yet .
Another GGAr offered to be a local sponsor for me too.

Kenneth

quote:

Originally posted by mtn-man:
One thing Hydee did do was make the puppymonster a Premium Member for kicks last year. LOL!

So does he have a PDA to put his pocketqueries into??
Must be hard to work with his paws....

Kenneth

I'm curious enough to take a look. Number of caches available will determine if I hang.

[/QUOTE]Nice of you to show up with the unknown-comic-ish bag over you head to remain anonymous.
Maybe......but maybe my views/opinions might fit right in with some Terracachers. At least one of my approvers is a GGAr and knows me pretty well and he hasn't revoked me yet. Another GGAr offered to be a local sponsor for me too.Kenneth[/QUOTE]

Predicted defensive blog-ish/log-ish response. Hmmmm, another one to this as well?