<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
    <channel>
        <title>Recommendation</title>
        <description> I realize the forums are experimental, but an actual question/recommendation: Why doesn&amp;#039;t the base functionality of project-gc match the base functionality of the geocaching site? I completely understand charging a premium for premium services, and think there are real benefits to premium project-gc status. But the basic statistics lag what geocaching offers, specifically around adventure lab caches. Maybe I&amp;#039;m in the minority, but it feels like a premium service shouldn&amp;#039;t charge for what is already free, all of the bonuses that come from membership are well worth the price and should be behind a paywall, but matching groundspeak&amp;#039;s basic level of stats should be a given, if not a mundane level of equivalence (they have always lagged third party offerings, even free offerings).</description>
        <link>https://project-gc.com/forum/read?2,49156,49156#msg-49156</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2026 19:23:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Phorum 5.2.23</generator>
        <item>
            <guid>https://project-gc.com/forum/read?2,49156,51122#msg-51122</guid>
            <title>Re: Recommendation</title>
            <link>https://project-gc.com/forum/read?2,49156,51122#msg-51122</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ Things like this is better posted in <a href="https://project-gc.com/qa/"  rel="nofollow">https://project-gc.com/qa/</a> and not in the test forum. <br />
<br />
My understanding is that lab caches uses a different API and the decision to make them a paid membership feature was based on the amount of work and related costs it took to get them to be included in the stats at all. The members asked for this and got it but it comes at a cost. That cost is that it&#039;s only available for users with paid membership.<br />
<br />
Since the &quot;normal caches-API&quot; itself requires the APIpartner to show less than what a basic member can see at the main site, this discrepancy is basically a standard in Geocaching so I don&#039;t think it&#039;s that odd that it continues for lab caches. The same thing is happening with lab caches in apps now. Seeing lab caches on the map in the official app is a premium member feature, but the ALs are available for basic members too. And now they show up as premium feature in other apps too because that&#039;s the requirement from the API. Tbh, Project-GC is one of few APIpartners that have this much content available for basic members, most others are almost useless for basic members.]]></description>
            <dc:creator>Pleu</dc:creator>
            <category>Test Forum</category>
            <pubDate>Sat, 08 May 2021 11:03:47 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>https://project-gc.com/forum/read?2,49156,49156#msg-49156</guid>
            <title>Recommendation</title>
            <link>https://project-gc.com/forum/read?2,49156,49156#msg-49156</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ I realize the forums are experimental, but an actual question/recommendation: Why doesn&#039;t the base functionality of project-gc match the base functionality of the geocaching site? I completely understand charging a premium for premium services, and think there are real benefits to premium project-gc status. But the basic statistics lag what geocaching offers, specifically around adventure lab caches. Maybe I&#039;m in the minority, but it feels like a premium service shouldn&#039;t charge for what is already free, all of the bonuses that come from membership are well worth the price and should be behind a paywall, but matching groundspeak&#039;s basic level of stats should be a given, if not a mundane level of equivalence (they have always lagged third party offerings, even free offerings).]]></description>
            <dc:creator>yervel</dc:creator>
            <category>Test Forum</category>
            <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2021 05:53:20 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>
