Forum: Questions And Answers About Geocaching
Topic: Censorship at forums.groundspeak.com
started by: Harrkev
Posted by Harrkev on Mar. 25 2002,8:36 amThis is absolutely insane.
On the Grounspeak forums, somebody mentioned the ability to edit the Meridian lawyer screen. I said that there was a program to do this, and even provided a link (which points here). The message was "held for review," which probably means that it will never see the light of day.
I went to a "test" thread, and posted a one-word message: "navicache". Simply put, that one word will exclude a message from being posted.
Jeremy must be very afraid of the competition. I can see having a list of profane words, but "Navicache" hardly qualifies as profane.
Posted by Harrkev on Mar. 25 2002,8:43 amI find it to be quite nice that I was able to mention groundspeak.com and geocaching.com without being censored on this forum.
Go first amendment!!!!
Posted by Gimpy on Mar. 25 2002,9:45 amSame thing happened to me last week. I posted on a thread about putting your caches on multiple sites, & when I hit the button to post my message, got a message stating that because of terminology used, my post was queued until a moderator could approve it. I used no profanity of any kind in my post. I guess the forums are set up to stop anything with the "N" word. Navicache. It did finally get posted about 5 hrs. later.
Posted by Scout on Mar. 25 2002,10:29 am
It is not insane. It is a logical tactic by a businessman who wants to suppress competition. Sadly, the tactic gives the lie to his claim that it is his Web site's "sole purpose to promote the new sport of Geocaching."
Posted by Rob on Mar. 25 2002,12:27 pm
Yeah the same thing happened to me a couple of weeks ago when I mentioned Navicache on the other site. It was held for review but did get posted within a few minutes.
I found this tactic quite revealing about them.
They do seem to allow positive things to be said about Navicache. Maybe they're taking a poll.
Posted by mikechim on Mar. 25 2002,4:02 pmThe only navicache thread that was really allowed was one that started off bashing navicache. Saying something to the effect that it's "people" had went on the posters regional website a bashed Jeremy. They then said that everyone should pull their caches from navicache.com. Well myself and a bunch of other people (most I've never scene on these forums) jumped in supporting navicace.com and saying how great of a site it was and how they doubt the "representatives" of navicache would go on a smear campaign. Anyway after about 8 positive reviews of navicache the thread was locked. Didn't bring it up here before just because I didn't see the need to start another battle (geocaching.com vs navicache.com) since the mocache vs no mocache battle was just settling down. But since it's been brought up figured I'd post it.
Posted by PC Medic on Mar. 25 2002,5:58 pmMust be talking about the message I just received after attempting to post a reply
< in this Groundspeak thread >
My last post from a few days ago with the same warning never appeared. I guess Navicache has become a dirty word ! because there were sure no other possible trigger words in my reply
Posted by Alan2 on Mar. 25 2002,7:18 pmI tried posting the following last week in some discussion about listing your cache and didn't get it past the censor.
"Here's all the service sites that I'm aware of that posts caches. Some have forums as well.
< http://www.Geocaching.com >
< http://www.Navicache.com >
< http://www.GeocachingWorldwide.com >
< http://www.Geocaching.hu > (European)
The following site combines the caches from all the sites above in a single world wide map and has links and articles about geocaching. It doesn't post the actual cache. That you do with one or more of the caches posting sites above. When you click on a cache site pushpin, it takes you to the cache page (I don't know what happens if you use more than one service, for example, you post your cache to geocaching.com and navicache.com)_
< http://www.brillig.com/geocaching/ >
By the way, I posted all my Queens NY caches on navicache.com also. They were originally posted only on geocaching.com I think competition will be good for the consumer.
Posted by dgridley on Mar. 25 2002,11:26 pm
To be honest, you don't see Coke advertising Pepsi..
He's got alot of time and money tied up in his venture.
Consequently, he's apparently made the decision to "blind" his user base to the competition, however misguided that might be.
I think it's a bad move, business-wise, and if he truly is censoring online posts simply for mentioning the word "navicache", it makes him look foolish as well.
Of course, depending on the parser his forum is using, you might get around that by using alternate spellings that are still phonetically correct...
Posted by PC Medic on Mar. 26 2002,4:56 am
You're right Coke doesn't advertise Pepsi, and Pepsi's does not run around saying "Things go better with Pepsi Cola".
I assure you he censors on the word "Navicache".
There is a new form of cache that has appeared where the cache moves about constantly. The cache is named "Cache Me If You Can". If it sounds familiar it should, it is part of the logo that appears here on Navicache (right at the top of this page as a matter of fact).
Anyway, there is a thread discussing this cache in the Groundspeak forumsto which I responded....
" 'Cache me if you can' Hey!, that sounds a lot like one of the official slogans over at Navicache.com . That's cool though, sounds like a cool idea, and I am curious to see if this catches on"
So when I submitted this reply, I get a message saying that my post has been held for review due to the fact it contains a "trigger word". Well reading the above, I could bet what that trigger word is.
Posted by Scout on Mar. 26 2002,10:46 am
Just so long as we're all clear that the real aim is to make a buck, like Coke and Pepsi are out to do, then Jeremy's tactics make sense. But a few people still seem to believe the claim on geocaching.com that it is the Web site's "sole purpose to promote the new sport of Geocaching."
Posted by Morseman on Mar. 27 2002,3:56 am
The thing that sticks in my craw over all of this is the high moral ground taken over a small businessman who put out alot of caches, but seemed to upset people who wanted to put some in the same area, and was riddiculed for putting his business URL on a little card, or giving away some CD-Roms. (jeeze, if only I had a £1 for every AOL disk that I've been offered by well meaning family & friends!) And yet the same people who shouted "commercialism" are seemingly happy to pay-to-play on the other site now.
The only thing I wont tollerate is intollerance.
Posted by Scout on Mar. 27 2002,8:21 am
Yes, the irony was pretty thick on that one. I was reminded of the old comparison to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. While the nasty little battle was waging over business cards and CDs, Jeremy was promoting Hollywood movies, corporate team-building businesses, mail-order hitchhiker sales, and then pay-to-play cache hunting. Ironic.
Posted by muddy_shoes on Mar. 27 2002,7:24 pmPlease excuse me if I'm missing something here. It seems like the mud slinging from emplacements on the moral highground is taking place right here. I've never been very active in the sport, but after reading this and other threads, I immediately went to 'the other site' and plunked my money down.
Pay to play? Looks to me like it's still free unless the cache placer wants it otherwise.
Censorship? I agree this is a major mistake, but the messages in this thread would lead me to believe that at least some messages DO show up after being 'reviewed'.
I'm not surprised that Jeremy wants some kind of reward for the time and effort he has invested. I don't know the people running this site and I applaud the great work they've done, but volunteers have a bad habit of burning out. Are you certain that you will have the same level of enthusiasm two years down the road? Will your actions in 2004 be 100% in sync with the statements you've made today?
I just hate to see wedges driven between competing groups. The sport is all that will suffer.
Just my $0.02 worth. I'll now disappear...
Posted by Scout on Mar. 27 2002,7:58 pm
Rick, you're welcome to contribute to geocaching.com. I'm sure the money will be well spent.
You're also welcome to call it "free" so long as information about some caches can be seen without paying a fee. I'll call it "pay-to-play" so long as a growing number of caches are hidden from non-paying geocachers. Six of one, half dozen of the other.
Yes, volunteers have a habit of burning out. A good antidote to this is recruitment of new volunteers. geocaching.com never explored this option publicly. The imposition of fees was decided in a manner quite different from how most communities of volunteers operate.
We all hate to see wedges. I registered with NaviCache.com only after my posting privileges on geocaching.com were revoked. I wasn't the one swinging the hammer.
Why should you disappear? Dialog is good.
Posted by Quinn on Mar. 27 2002,9:19 pmYes, I agree with scout, you are most welcome here as well as your opions. We have been around quite longer than you may think and instead of backing down a gear or two we have slowly but surely picked up speed as far as the additions to the website. A thing you may wish to take into consideration is the fact you are only able to go by one sites thoughts which is this ones, why do I say that? because on the other site those thoughts and opinions are blocked unless posing negative about Navicache.
I have sat here and reading the comments as they rolled in and let it go at that, but hearing you say that you plunked down your money just because of what ws mentioned here made little sense to me but I may have over looked something.
I look at it this way...It was stated by the other sites owner that his only wish was to see the sport progress and that seeing this happen was his top priority, yet he bans anyone or censors and locks threads that have anything to do with a site other than his own.
If you would have walked into the Geocaching website and mentioned that you just plunked down money here at Navicache your post would have been deleted, oh wait! it would never have been added!
But it's good to see a new face here and I hope you decide to continue your visits. You have an opinion and I am sure it is as important to you as mine is to me.
Posted by Choberiba on Mar. 28 2002,1:08 pmI just want to add that what a lot of people are complaining about isn't directly tied with money.
I bought about $100 worth of stuff from the other site, thinking that I was supporting a non-commercial hobby.
A PayPal link can still be found at the bottom of the other site, I've donated in the past for the reasons listed above but noticed that none of those previous donations count towards my "membership" even though the sum is greater than $30.
I guess in short, I'm just bummed that what could have been a great example of people working together for mutual enjoyment, has become just another dot.com.
$30 isn't a lot of money for the bandwidth the heavy users consume, so for me the dollar figure is irrelevant.
The data being horded and the messages being screened for content are unacceptable to me. I started the usenet group because I wanted to be able to use an occasional swear word, say that Quinn looked hot in black leather pumps, speak my mind about whatever without worry of being kicked off.
My keyboard is shot so I'll finish with:
Pepsi doesn't have a PayPal-donate button on the bottom of their site. He needs to decide if this is a business or a project.
I'll support him in either context but the way it looks to me at the moment, he's swinging both ways. That's never favorable to the people you're interacting with.
It's like being in a marriage and diddling the checkout girl.
Nothing wrong with a little trim, but it's sleazy if you're putting on a faithful facade
Posted by PC Medic on Mar. 28 2002,3:18 pm
THAT ! is NOT a pretty picture to put in ones mind
Posted by PC Medic on Mar. 28 2002,4:32 pm
Hello Muddy Shoes, and let me first (as one of the people running this site) say Welcome to Navicache, and I hope you don't just speak and run. Everyone and every opinion is welcome here.
I also am not surprised that Jeremy wants some kind of reward for his efforts as I (and the rest on the team as far as I know) are the same way. I guess the difference however, is that our (or at least my) rewards are in everytime a new member signs up, or every time someone sends an email or posts a message in the forum telling us how they like a new feature, and what a great job we are doing. Do I think we will have the "same level of enthusiasm two years down the road?", and "Will our actions in 2004 be 100% in sync with the statements we've made today?", I like to think so.
You see I believe that the only volunteers that burn out, are those that refuse to work with, and accept help from other volunteers. So to answer your question...if the sport, and all its participants continue to show the current level of entusiasm, then yes, I think we will to. Because after all, we started this site, and continue to maintain this site out of our enjoyment of the sport, and not the money.
Now, As for the censorship issue (which is what this thread was all about), I whole heartedly disagree with censorship of a members opinions in the forums. Now obviously false statements, personal attacks, and abusive or vulgar language (also known as Mud Slinging), or discussions of illegal activities, can not be tolerated, but that is not what folks are doing here now is it. Instead they are discussing how another site has chosen to censor (remove or refuse) their posts based on simple mention of something they do not agree with, and in many cases seemingly, simply because of who they associate with.
I mean look at my example earlier in this thread, hardly cause for a post not to make it past the censors. But hey, that's just my opinion, and as I said, opinions are welcome here.
By the way, did I mention that I can not even place a post that contains my signature line there? Nope, get the cute little posting police pop-up and post never appears.
Now you tell me who is driving the wedges between the groups!
Posted by Firemedic on April 05 2002,7:23 amOOPS! Got a message from that board that someone got a Garmin GPS V for $425. I sent a reply that I got one for $409 including shipping and used the link from here. Their censorship creeper caught the referral extention (I had forgotten about it when I used it) and is holding it for review. I guess thats one reply that won't make it.
Posted by Quinn on April 05 2002,8:14 amlol...way it goes I guess at least you saved some cash. I hope you like the gps, I love mine.
Used it to get down to Virginia and it never skipped a beat until I went into an area that I didn't have the maps loaded...wouldn't you know it had to be Baltimore!!!
Getting turned around in Baltimore is nooooo fun at all.
Posted by Choberiba on April 05 2002,10:37 amI didn't want to start a whole new thread for this, but I couldn't help but be a little amused as people try to figure out a way to slip in the word < Navicache > in their post.
I may just have to pop in and type w w w . n a v i c a c h e . c o m to slip by the autofilters.
[I used shorterlink with a pointer to one of my caches since shorterlink didn't want to make a link to the navicache home page]
Posted by Quinn on April 05 2002,11:22 amChobey...just so you know... this site also owns www.geocachingplanet.com and www.geo-cache.com which will also take you here. I am sure they are unknown and unblocked, though soon may be
Posted by Choberiba on April 06 2002,1:42 amThanks Quinn, I'll keep those domains in mind as well.
I've decided *not* to copy the cache only listed here to gc.biz
I linked to it as < http://shorterlink.com/?TLTTD2 > to bypass any filters. People on the other site were making a good argument that if *all* caches are listed on both sites than why bother with the others. I might just have to remove my others from over there but not quite yet.
FWIW I just remembered to change the link on www.cachestash.com to point to this site.
I'm really bad at updating it.
A word of warning to the curious, I have a *HUGE* image that loads from the getgo, I'm trying to figure out where in the heck the city in the photo is. (2.5 MB)
It came in one of my daily downloads of...um...art?
Since I'm standing here at the microphone anyway, I can't help but to wonder out loud if the cache difficulty ratings are destined to remain at Easy/Medium/Hard ??
I'd like to see a greater range available though I *love* the current ability to add info such as "water" "restrooms" "pets"...
Posted by Quinn on April 06 2002,3:14 amThe cache rating and terrain has been changed a couple of days ago...you can now rate a cache from "1.0" up to "5.0" instead of easy, medium, hard. just go to your cache page and use the dit feature. We didn't want to post anything public yet as we were trying to make sure everything was working fine before hand.
Posted by Alan2 on April 06 2002,5:46 amAnyone who's followed my posts here and at geocaching.com knows I had been a very harsh critic of Geocaching.com I recently complained about the "censorship" in their forum as to the mentioning of other caching sites.
Frankly, I had to eat crow about my position and apologize as I was wrong. Here's Jeremy's response posted on the Geocaching.com site to my unfair complaint.
You have to give the man his due.
Posted by Quinn on April 06 2002,6:37 amAlan...what does he consider spam?
I can sit here right now and name three threads in his forum where a debate has taken place and once it started going "pro Navicache" the thread was locked and no more comments were allowed.
Posted by PC Medic on April 06 2002,7:07 amBased on my "personal" experiences I would say that is a load.
I would think even he could come up with a better excuse than that.
I have an example of a post I made earlier in this very thread, tell me how that example constitutes SPAM? Yet it and several others have never been "approved" as he calls it. In fact, the only post of mine in the past month that has finally appeared (after 5 days) was in "TEST" form and was simply my signature line, nothing more.
Posted by Scout on April 08 2002,7:19 am
I think you apologized too soon. I mentioned < http://www.geocachingworldwide.com > in a reply to a post on geocaching.com. The text of my post was replaced by Jeremy Irish with a sentence saying advertising is not allowed in the forums. I replied asking what constitutes advertising. My post was deleted. My posting privileges were revoked. I never received a reply to my inquiries about the matter. This happened nine months ago, so censorship on the geocaching.com forums is nothing new.
Posted by Katetrex on April 16 2002,2:41 pmActually someone has recently posted a message that contained the word Navicache and it slipped by the censors -- it was in Morse Code.
Posted by TakeTheActive on April 17 2002,12:46 pm
Umm... Why don't you think that it's Istanbul, Turkey?
The < Galata Bridge > (Photo Gallery, Bridges, 2nd Screen, 2nd from left, top row) looks the same. And, then there's also the "Vicky Chen - Istanbul" writing on the right side. ??
Posted by Morseman on April 17 2002,2:59 pm
I wondered that as well! But thought that this was too obvious to be the place pictured, and that this was a picture taken by the person named, who happened to live in Istanbul!
For the first few minutes I was looking to see if I could read any billboards or signs, maybe some car license plates, you know, being a real detective. Then I spotted the cruise ships in the harbor and noticed the left-right scroll bar. Scrolling FULL RIGHT, I read all the text - "Vicky Chen - Istanbul" - so I said, this is too freaking obvious - our fellow cacher wouldn't have missed this. So, I keyed "Istanbul" into AskJeeves.com, found a place with photos and found a heading of bridges (did you look at my link?) There's a great view of the Galata Bridge in Choberiba's picture, so, looking at all the bridges I believe I found a match. They definitely are from different times, since the building to the left of the two red and white horizontally-striped towers in the AskJeeves photo has a different roof, although the first four floors look the same (and the red and white towers are gone).
I'm curious to hear his reply...
Posted by Morseman on April 17 2002,10:42 pm
I think you could be right, but I can't get back to the original picture to compare, as the link seems to have been altered.
Posted by TakeTheActive on April 18 2002,12:05 pm
My link to the Bridge still works, so here's a link to the < HUGE image >.
[No comments from the author yet...]
Posted by PC Medic on April 18 2002,3:11 pmWhat does any of this have to do with censorship?
Please try to remain on topic folks.
Posted by Scout on April 18 2002,3:46 pm
Hey, are you trying to censor this discussion? ;-)
Posted by Choberiba on April 18 2002,6:43 pmPC Medic wrote:
True, and sorry for leading the topic away from poking pins in the Jeremy voodoo doll.
I can't believe I missed the frame on the page, but I still can't read the writing on any of the boats.
Obligatory topic: I have about a half-dozen user names on the commercial site. Each one of them mostly behaves themselves but occasionally the sock-puppet will be used to express my opinions on a matter.
My point in mentioning this is that I only have one user name here. I never even considered creating a second since the need to protect myself from being banned or whatever (well maybe by PC Medic) has never been an issue here.
Speaking of topical, (This will drive old PC insane, just you watch) I'm on a Kevin Smith flick kick at the moment having finally watched Clerks the other day. I've rented Mallrats and the animated TV Clerks show that had a short run in 2000.
I'd like to create a geocache in tribute to these characters.
Maybe a multi-cache where you have to find Randall, Jay, Dante, and finishing up at Silent Bob.
Keeping it rated G will be the real challenge
Posted by mikechim on April 19 2002,1:42 am
how about chasing Amy, Dogma, and Jay and Silent bob strike back (still haven't scene that one).
Sorry PC, I really am, but I couldn't resist, one of my best friends is a huge Kevin Smith fan so all of us end up watching them alot. Besides not much in the way of censoring has been going on lately or at least not any new and different censoring, so a little change was nice.
Posted by dgridley on April 19 2002,8:22 am
Then I guess you've probably been to Kevin Smith's website? < http://www.viewaskew.com? > I'd love to see them do a movie script based on geocaching but I guess Strike Back was the last Silent Bob and Jay movie (great flick, btw, tho Dogma is my favorite)... now back to our regularly scheduled programming...
Posted by Scout on April 19 2002,8:49 am
Funny how censorship works. Censor the non-conformists and eventually the non-conformists leave. The need for censorship lessens and those who are left believe that no censorship is even at work.
Posted by Scout on April 19 2002,8:51 amHey, I don't know when it happened, but it looks like I've become a "Caching Madman." Chatting madman is more like it. Better go.
Posted by Choberiba on April 20 2002,8:31 pmdgridley says:
< Clerks: Sell Out (2002) >
I'm watching Dogma for the third time today.
When I rent a movie, by golly I get my monies worth.
Finding something clean to quote wasn't an easy task.
Metatron: You know those constitutionals He likes to take?
Rufus: I think we're beyond euphemisms at this point: God's a Skee-Ball fanatic.
The rabid hamster reminds you to cache responsibly.
Posted by PC Medic on April 20 2002,9:15 pmPolite hints are a terrible thing to waste