Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Re: Different Caching Sites

Expand Messages
  • s6sputnik
    I m with Russ...I can barely keep up with one 2 or more would be the end of me! S6sputnik/Shawn In a message dated 7/30/2013 2:04:05 P.M. Central Daylight
    Message 1 of 12 , Jul 30, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      I'm with Russ...I can barely keep up with one 2 or more would be the end of me!
       
      S6sputnik/Shawn
       
      In a message dated 7/30/2013 2:04:05 P.M. Central Daylight Time, waterweasel@... writes:
       

      It is not so much that I 'refuse to jump out of the lily pond' but rather one site is more than enough to try to keep up with.


      Russ the Waterweasel

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Denise Vajdak
      Sent: Jul 30, 2013 1:56 PM
      To: CTG Yahoo Group
      Subject: Re: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Re: Different Caching Sites

       

      It has been my observation that Groundspeak does not play nice with any other cache listing sites and it is sad. They are so limiting. There are other sites and unfortunately the reason some have low numbers of caches is that many cachers simply refuse to jump out of the lily pond and give the other sites a good effort. Some of the sites like opencaching.US and terracaching.com discourage cross-listings. Opencaching.US will allow them though. They also even have a Munzee attribute right on the cache page. They have even promoted contests by other listing sites, something that will never happen at gocaching.com. Opencaching.COM (the Garmin site) encourages cross-listing though and allows you to upload your finds, so some of the listings are scraped from geocachng.com. Jus be sure you know the difference in t he sites.  Not too long ago, HeadHardHat wanted to do a series between sites. Most of the alternate sites were good with it and were glad to play along.

      Just as there are muliple listing sites, there are options for travel bugs. GeoKrety, for instance will work on geocaching.com, opencaching.us, navicache.com, etc.  so one trackable can easily travel between listing sites. Again, Groundspeak wants to limit their trackables to ONLY their listings. Everyone has a choice to be limited or to diversify and find a whole world full of fun. Don't let one site tell you what you can and can't do in this hobby.

      Denise Vajdak
      NativTxn
      tx.ag/denise

      On Jul 29, 2013 6:03 PM, "semperquestio" <sqcaching@...> wrote:
       

      Yes, I've been following this saga on the geocaching forums for a while. Although I will not get into the facets of that discussion, I will touch on the subject of the travelers sitting in these caches.

      It is my opinion (for what it's worth) that all of the travelers that are geocaching.com trackable and have been sitting in those caches throughout this dispute should be pulled and set free to travel as soon as possible.

      Unless something significant has happened lately, it would appear these caches will either not be listed on geocaching.com for some time, maybe not ever. And given the low volume of traffic generated by the other listing sites, it is not at all fair to the traveler owners to have the travelers stranded in a place where few can can find them.

      At the very least, Cybercat should contact the owner of each trackable in her caches, tell them what is going on and ask what they would like to have happen to their trackables.

      {/soapbox}

      Back to lurking.

      SQ

      --- In CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com, "chemist_kahuna" <chemistrb@...> wrote:
      >
      > About a month ago a geocacher friend in New York, where I used to live, told me that a TB of theirs that had been missing for several years had suddenly resurfaced in a cache near San Antonio that hadn't been published yet. He had figured out a way to see the unpublished cache and told me the coordinates so that I could be FTF and rescue his TB. Thus began my involvement in a series of caches, intrigue and politics that cachers can stumble into when they don't play by the rules. Cybercat, the owner of the cache, had placed the cache in the grounds of a wildlife resort called the Serengeti http://www.serengetiresort.com/. You can drive onto the grounds and see some of the animals behind the fences for free, and she had hidden a series of caches on the grounds. Weeks after I found the unpublished cache, it still hadn't been published. Apparently, Cybercat had become embroiled in a dispute with the Review er about placing a cache in a commercial property to promote its business and (God forbid!) mentioning the existence of a competing geocaching website, which had already published the series of 10 caches. (see http://www.opencaching.com/en/) As an aside, if you Google the term "opencaching" the first entry is a bogus site that has been created to draw traffic away from the real OpenCaching site, but that is another story. Still reading? Your life must be as exciting as mine. Anyway, the series of 10 Serengeti caches are all large, ammo-can, well stocked with TB's, coins, trackables, pathtags, etc. You drive around this service road and then get within 100 or 200 feet and then get out and find the easy large cache. It's free and the owners are aware of the caches. I finished all of them in about 90 minutes. I had no trouble downloading the series to my Garmin from the Opencaching website. If the reason you go geocaching is to find interesting areas and/or large caches filled with swag for the kiddies of all ages, then this is definitely something you might want to check out. Cybercat has even promised to allow you go log a them in Geocaching.com by just logging one of her archived caches for each one of the OpenCaching caches you find, if the numbers are important to you. See: http://www.opencaching.com/en/#find/OX4DYRY?&bbox=29.8307,-98.5647,29.848,-98.524&
      >
      > I did rescue my friend's TB and will send it on its journey to Houston next weekend.
      >
      > Caching. Intrigue. Politics. Who knew?
      >
      > Rick (Chemist Kahuna)
      >

    • Rachele DiTullio
      I have checked out some of the other sites and they re simply not as good. opencaching.com has very little in the way of code support to format cache pages
      Message 2 of 12 , Jul 30, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        I have checked out some of the other sites and they're simply not as good. opencaching.com has very little in the way of code support to format cache pages compared to geocaching.com. I imported several of my caches to that site only to have to remove them (puzzles specifically) because I could not format the page properly. I'm also not that keen on its rating structure (not that D/T is perfect) but it's even MORE subjective.

        My two pesos,
        -Rachele/strontium87
      • semperquestio
        Why should Groundspeak try to play well with others? They are a business and they are trying to protect their only assets - listings and site architecture.
        Message 3 of 12 , Jul 30, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Why should Groundspeak try to play well with others? They are a business and they are trying to protect their only assets - listings and site architecture. Sure, they cannot stop anyone from cross-listing caches, but they sure don't have to support or encourage the patronizing of other listing services either. I can't fault them for protecting their business interests even if I don't agree with all their decisions.

          And for the record, I have checked out every listing site I have ever heard of and none of them even come close to measuring up to what Groundspeak offers both in sheer numbers of listings and site features. Also, I am a big fan on 1-stop shopping. I'm not going to go to multiple sites to find caches. That's just too much work for something I do for fun. Besides, there are still about 2,151,900 or so caches on GC.com I have not gotten to yet.
        • Barbara Dukette
          I agree. Once I ve found all of GC s caches, I ll check out another site. GiGi and JoJo (Barbara)
          Message 4 of 12 , Jul 30, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            I agree. Once I've found all of GC's caches, I'll check out another site. 
            GiGi and JoJo (Barbara)

            On Jul 30, 2013, at 6:00 PM, "semperquestio" <sqcaching@...> wrote:

             

            Why should Groundspeak try to play well with others? They are a business and they are trying to protect their only assets - listings and site architecture. Sure, they cannot stop anyone from cross-listing caches, but they sure don't have to support or encourage the patronizing of other listing services either. I can't fault them for protecting their business interests even if I don't agree with all their decisions.

            And for the record, I have checked out every listing site I have ever heard of and none of them even come close to measuring up to what Groundspeak offers both in sheer numbers of listings and site features. Also, I am a big fan on 1-stop shopping. I'm not going to go to multiple sites to find caches. That's just too much work for something I do for fun. Besides, there are still about 2,151,900 or so caches on GC.com I have not gotten to yet.

          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.