Group: Super Administrators
Joined: Dec. 2001
||Posted: Aug. 10 2006,7:52 am
|Quote (Batona @ Aug. 09 2006,9:10 pm)|
|Quote (PC Medic @ July 27 2006,9:55 pm)|
|Never understood why sites would not allow cross-listing.|
There is only one site I know that discourages cross posting. I agree with the reasoning behind it.
There is only one that (I am aware of) which forbids cross-posting, but there have been a couple that have discouraged it for their own various reasons.
There's one big site and then some smaller sites. Each has its niche. That one site is seeking caches that are unique. The feeling is that if everything were cross listed, there is no reason to visit yet another listing site. I think that reasoning has merit.
Actually you present one of the reasons here in that each site "has its niche". Some offer features others don't, some provide more direct contact to other geocachers in your area, some are more commercial while others are more open (community) minded.
And as the thread directly below this one (at this point) highlights, folks who have listed on multiple sites frequently forget to keep all those listings up-to-date. Stale data do little for the seeker.
While I agree that stale data is of little use to the seeker, this problem is not limited to cross-listed caches. Human nature is that many folks will try something only to become bored with it at some point. Whne this happens many will simply move on to something else and in the case of an activity like geocaching, this effects others involved as they have simply abandoned the hobby and their listings. All that can be done in cases like this is for the admins to retire those listings as this becomes apparent. This issue is actually where the open-caching concept (which we support) was born. This concept allows among other things, for sites to share data and synch their databases. This could eventually mean that if you list a cache or post a find to site A, then those changes would also take place automatically on site B. For example this open 'community' spirit is what enables locations of caches listed here to automatically appear on Buxley's Maps and other sites.
Yes, the data belong to the cachers, but a cacher should be able to restrict his data if he chooses. I do not have a problem with that whatsoever.
Agreed and why here they are able to set a flag stating if they want their cache data to be available for listing on other sites. This is better than the alternative where a site may try to claim ownership of the listing (that is a whole different topic though).
Two of the biggest pluses I see to cross-listing are that 1) it sparks the various sites to try to offer something the other guy does not have and 2) putting all your eggs in one basket could be devestating to the sport should a single major player begin to struggle. For those that say the latter would never happen ... I remember the same being said for companies like Kodak, Xerox, GM, Chevy, and any other number of examples.