This post from Mr. Cowspots about covers it for me too.
I also got a somewhat icky feeling when I got sponsorship offers before
even asking. Wasn't I supposed to expound on my cache ethics and such
/before/ getting sponsored? Does one get brownie points for having more
sponsored cachers (underlings)?
Steve
David Thompsen wrote:
> */Guy Aldrich <graldrich@gmail.com>/* wrote:
>
> Dave, could you please explain what you mean by"TC.com leaves a bad
> taste in my mouth ?
>
> Sure. I guess you're kind of becoming an unofficial spokesman for
> TC.com, since you and your wife now own more TC's than everyone else
> in the state combined.
>
> I'll start at the top. From the Terracaching site, here are some of
> the things they offer that you don't get at other sites.
>
> (the following is from their confusing FAQ)
> ..."TPS points, MCE/UCR ratings, Locationless caches, and the
> breathing room to post fun, quality caches that don't always fit
> within the other site's "guidelines"....
>
> 1) TPS points & MCE/UCR ratings. I start to go a little cross-eyed
> when I look at the formulae they use to try to determine this. I'd
> rather do the 1040 long form. I suppose they're trying to say that
> they have a competitive scoring system in place. Ok, great. As far as
> Arizona's concerned, I've been pleasantly surprised by Noshdoo Tsoh'
> excellent Arizona Challenge Points page.
> (http://www.deepsouthwest.com/geocaching/stats/) I didn't like it at
> first, but over time it grew on me, and gives an interesting take on
> the relative difficulty of caches. I prefer it to the TPS structure
> for my state. MCE/UCR ratings? I suppose these are feedback and
> participation ratings. Again, the formulae are enough to make you go
> nuts. My favorite part of their FAQ even compares UCR ratings to a
> pyramid scheme.
>
> 2) Locationless caches. OK, so they have 'em ... GC.com has some,
> and keeps mentioning some new replacement concept for them in the
> (indeterminate) future. If you absolutely positively HAVE to have
> locationless, I guess this is a tilt in TC.com's favor.
> Realistically, I think that LC's are, for the most part, an extremely
> minor or nonexistent part of most cachers life. I've done my share of
> locationless. They're a neat idea, but not the focus of my caching
> experience at all.
>
> 3) "breathing room to post fun, quality caches that don't always fit
> within the other site's "guidelines".... Here's where the site owner
> gets a little snarky. It's no surprise to me that he used to be an
> avid cacher on "the other site" :) , decided to start TC.com,
> plagiarized their legalese, got banned, and now goes by the name of
> "Angry Kid". Hrm. This is where I start to get the feeling of
> elitism, of the chip on the shoulder, of "I'm taking my toys somewhere
> else". Whatever makes you happy --- but if you take your toys
> elsewhere, play nicely. Don't lob spitballs at the old base camp.
>
> Other things that confuse me :
>
> 4) This is the index to the site.
> (http://www.terracaching.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=623)
> Notice how section 3, "Acceptable Cache Guidelines", has no
> hyperlink? Are there any cache guidelines at all? Or can you post
> any cache you want as long as you find two sponsors? Two buddies? If
> I make two more Terracaching sock puppets, I should theoretically be
> able to post a cache full of porn, crack vials, Satanist pamphlets,
> and broken glass next to an active military installation. I could
> list every fact about this clearly wrong cache --- but as long as my
> sponsors are willing co-conspirators, it'll go up live on the site as
> an approved cache.
>
> [Now my hypothetical example might eventually disappear, but the
> mechanisms of cache archival over there look like they take a
> looooooooong time.]
>
> Sometimes you lose the battle within GC.com's guidelines. I would
> argue that having guidelines and designated approvers beats the
> alternative of the slight anarchy I see over there.
>
> ---
>
> These are SOME of the reasons that _at_this_time_ I'm not interested
> in TC.com. I reserve the right to change my mind if it seems to
> improve in the future. No one should feel obligated to belong just
> one site. No one should feel the need to discuss just one site on the
> listserv. If I hear amazing things about caches that they offer that
> just knock my socks off, maybe I'll change my mind.
>
> But I'm not holding my breath.
>
> --Dave, The Cow Spots
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=31637/*http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>____________________________________________________________
>Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv@azgeocaching.com
>To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
>http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching
>
>Arizona's Geocaching Resource
>http://www.azgeocaching.com
>
>
____________________________________________________________
Az-Geocaching mailing list
listserv@azgeocaching.com
To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching
Arizona's Geocaching Resource
http://www.azgeocaching.com
(text/plain)