[OSM-talk] OSM not acceptable for geocaching.com

[Thomas Wood]

2008/11/15 Till Harbaum / Lists <lists at harbaum.org>:
> Hi,
>
> i have recently released a geocache which basically required you to look up a certain node
> in the OSM database. The position of that node was then the place where the geocache was
> hidden. Geocaching.com users can perhaps still read the original listing at:
> http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=80a9308b-6719-485d-a0dc-846798a8cac2

Through a bug in their site code, the original listing is visible
here: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cdpf.aspx?guid=80a9308b-6719-485d-a0dc-846798a8cac2

> Geocaching.com recently completely deleted that cache antry as they claim that it forces you to use a certain
> software (a web browser!!!) and a certain web service.

They have un-published the listing, an event that occurs not very
often - usually only if the reviewer who published it realises they
made a mistake soon after.
The specific guideline reads something like caches that require
(unusual) third party software to be installed are not permitted,
there's also a similar rule about cache perminance in terms of
external resources on the net - eg hosting an mp3 on a personal
website will not be acceptable as a part of the 'puzzle' as they have
a habit of falling offline.

> This is a strange explanation as geocaches requesting you to find a certain image on google earth
> are pretty common. On the other hand Geocaching.com seems to have a business with google. This
> may be the explanation why they don't like to deal with openstreetmap. I really wonder if
> it's google behind this.

They have business with Google as far as using their Maps API,
publishing KML files, and using AdWords, I don't think they have any
further links with them.

> This includes quite extreme behaviour on the GC.com side as they are not using their usual methods
> of disabling or archiving caches. Instead they reset their entire database with respect to this
> cache to the state before it was published. It's like they really want to clean all traces related to
> this geocache.

"The GC.com" side is usually just a volunteer reviewer rather than one
of the company's employees. As noted, caches can be removed completely
from the site - 'unpublished' on the event of the reviewer making a
mistake.

> IMHO a very interesting issue and may mean that google sees a serious competitor arriving ...

Not in my view.

> Till

I'm asking some contacts I have to see if I can get the full logs for
publishing and subsequent removal of it to see if a reason is further
given.

-- 
Regards,
Thomas Wood
(Edgemaster)