Hi, it's restored. They say that they thought OSM was an unreliable commercial (due to the request for donations) service which they don't want to have their users to do.
Kind of strange explanation as the purpose of OSM is pretty obvious and my cache even said "osm is for streetmaps what wikipedia is for encyclopedia". So the idea that it's non-commercial basically can't be missed. Till Am Mittwoch 26 November 2008 schrieb Nick Black: > Did you get anywhere with this? Have you tried emailing the admins at > geocaching.com to see why they removed the cache? I'd love to hear more. > > Nick > > > On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Thomas Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > 2008/11/15 Till Harbaum / Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > 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) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > talk mailing list > > talk@openstreetmap.org > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > > > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
