From:
"Mike Teague" <kvuo@earthlink.net>
Sent: 6/2/2001 9:59:43 PM
To:
gpsstash@yahoogroups.com
Cc:
Bcc:
Subject:

Re: [gpsstash] Geocaching and whats to be!


----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Stum"
To:
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 7:26 PM
Subject: Re: [gpsstash] Geocaching and whats to be!


>
> >The thing I hate about this kinda internet faction crap, is I _always_
find
> >myself in the middle of the debate...
>
> :-) From day one, Mike... from day one... :)
> And I've admired you for admitting that... always diplomatic, but never
> afraid to say what you're thinking. "You're a good man, Charlie Brown."
>
> >I agree with you Matt, that Jeremy has no claim to the word "geocaching",
> >but I think he's probably done more for the game than ANY of us,
including
> >Dave Ulmer... Remember, Dave bailed out after about 5 weeks because I
> >wouldn't put his imaginary "cybercaches" on my site...
>
> But you know the difference between now and then? You didn't tell Dave
> that he couldn't build his own web page listing his caches... you didn't
> threaten to sue him if he infringed upon the name. You didn't tell me
that
> I couldn't build my distance calculator... you didn't tell the guy in
Australia
> to take a leap when he created his page (sorry, I forget the name at the
> moment)... you never claimed to be the one and only "official" site for
> caching. You shared your data freely, and accepted it from others. You
> had a true passion for the *activity* rather than just wanting to make a
> name for yourself. The "more the merrier" was the philosophy we all had.


I dont think Jeremy is going after people listing their _own_ caches on
their _own_ websites, or even from websites other than geocaching.com.... If
he is, he has not a leg to stand on, as far as I can tell...

I did hear the report of navicache.com being told not to use the word
geocache.. and that truly has me bothered... I dont mind Jeremy keeping his
site copyrighted.. he has alot of original content...



>
> What we needed (and still need) was a template for sharing and mirroring
> the data on all of the sites. We were still relying on pretty
labor-intensive
> methods, but it would've been pretty easy to build a common template and
> distribute tools in Excel, perl, VBscript, etc. to read and merge the
data.
> I love brainstorming that sort of thing and would be willing to help.
(However,
> before I become active again, I want to know that the caching "community"
> is willing to stand behind some basic ground rules concerning invalid
> locations for caches... which I think is also a major concern of Dave's.)
>


I do not know enough about database management to comment... I know that
keeping a text file database was somewhat tedious when you and I were
working together last year though :)

Jeremy has the database completely automated at this point... All ya do is
fill out a form and it's up, pretty much...

Invalid locations have pretty much been figured out, but there are always
new people...





> >Perhaps I am the only person who has pleasant thoughts about BOTH of
them...
>
> I've never really talked to him, and I do realize that all of my
information
> about him is second-hand. I'm reserving my personal judgement based
> on the reply I get from him to my e-mail. And even then, I am the type
> of person who can disagree with you on issues and still think you're a
> pretty swell guy. :) One of my mantras has always been "Argue the
> issue, not the person."
>
> >I just take a step back, look at what the objective of the game is... To
get
> >some coordinates, go find a box...
>
> Yup.
>
> >Jeremy's taken it beyond that, You can get the stash coordinates. he has
> >various email systems setup so you can know when your own cache has been
> >logged, we can log online, as well as in the cache.. the site is free..
etc.
> >etc. Theres no argument that it's a better site than we had, and we'd end
up
> >with the same complaints, no matter WHO ran it, if it got this good.....
>
> Oh, sure, you can't please everyone all the time. But, Mike, I can never
imagine
> you threatening to sue someone because they used the term "geocaching" on
> their website.


Nope, I would have never even thought of doing that, and I'm still trying to
figure out if Jeremy actually did that... That would be seriously disturbing
to me... I sent him an email about 6 hours ago asking him about it... I'll
wait till I get a response to figure that one out...




>
> Again, I'm not arguing that the features on his site aren't great. But
what happens
> when/if he suddenly disappears? Sure, the sport will continue, but
because a lot
> of us have been sitting idle because someone else has claimed to be the
one and
> only official site it will take us quite a long time to rebuild the
features (and data!).
> There needs to be a "network" in place of many smaller sites, not just
one. If we
> design the tools correctly, then you could submit your data to any of a
number of
> sites and it shouldn't take long for it to automatically propagate to the
rest of the
> participating sites.
>


That sounds interesting, I dont know how to do it, but for some reason I
don't think Jeremy would be against that idea.... I guess I could be wrong,
but I dont know if anyone's even suggested it to him..






> To be honest, my vision of GPS-based cache hunting was to go even lower
tech
> in the future, not higher. For example, you'd subscribe to a newsletter.
New
> members would receive a mailing (snail mail, perhaps, but e-mail is okay
too)
> containing a simple list of coords, no text, no descriptions, no names.
You have
> to find the cache to get that info. And then each month you'd receive
another
> mailing containing the coords added that month. Simple, mysterious, and
even
> more rewarding to find the caches. But I do realize that idea has some
flaws
> as well.



That doesn't sound bad at all, but in order for this to be accessable, we
need a LOT of caches.. We bascially have a good amount right now... I dont
think newsletters would have worked, because most people are lazy... We
woulda been probably stuck around 200-500 caches by now, only the die-hards
out doing it... Now, perhaps that is good!! .. I dunno!



>
> Maybe I should just go back to lurking until I'm feeling less grouchy :)
> Matt
>



Nah! it is good to hear from ya again!!! it's a bummer that more political
nonsense got a discussion going...