showbizkid

Nothing would please me more than to see "districts" taken out of the category altogether and just allow NRHP sites that are a single structure or related group of structures. Districts are too nebulous. Where do you mark the waymark. The center? How do you define this? What if it's boring and not photogenic? Do you attempt to waymark each of the four corners? Could be a lot of work. I vote for allowing one entry for a "district" and not two or more simply because the boundaries of the district increased. If I could use a real world example for a new category - City Halls. If a city hall is waymarked and new addition is built on that city hall, another waymarker couldn't place another City Hall waymark on the addition, right? The same should apply to NRHP and be so stated in the requirements. There are those who will play the game just to rack up numbers. Two or more waymarks for the same district is unnecessary. sbk

Sounds like you should start a group.

A new category proposal - This Old Church - is up for peer review. This category seeks to waymark old church buildings - those 100 years old or older. This includes former churches now converted to other uses. There are a few variables in this one, we are trying to be comprehensive, but only four of the variables are required, the rest are optional. To vote on this (and any other categories up for review), here the link: http://www.Waymarking.com/groups/peer_review.aspx Thanks!

Walgreens disposable camera is recycled. They take the outer covering and use them again for future cameras. I am hardly making the environment worse that way. Of course, all the driving I do, using gas...that isnt helping the environment. Can I make a point I've made before? You couldn't geocache without a GPS Receiver right? Why is it so hard for people to understand - a GPSr and a camera are going to be required for Waymarking. Period. I am against GPSr in the original waymark photo, but for logs, why not? Proof is proof.

Truthfully, I don't see the necessity of that -- unless it is a sheer numbers thing. Here in New Hampshire we have only 188 official state historic markers. (Actually a few more that don't appear on the official web site list). Some towns have erected their own markers, and there are other markers that may be view as historic. So, for the NH Historic Marker Category (and Vermont), I just dealt with this using variables Official State Markers, Local Historical Markers, Unofficial Markers. Works very well for us. I think silverquill's variables are good. "Local Markers," "State Markers," "Other" (with some guidance) would be clearer in Historic Markers category.

Masonic Temples The category already exists!

This may be a new bug. In several categories: WWI Monuments, Civil War Monuments, North Carolina Historic Markers, National Register of Historic Places - the groups have placed a variable which is a check box stating something like "I will upload a picture and make it the default photo" or "I will upload a photo showing my GPS receiver". (This variable was placed because of a bug with the "required photo" function - that box which appears automatically if you select "photo required" in category settings. When submitting waymarks, then editing them, this feature can cause an edit to go to a "Virtual Directory Error" page and the edit doesn't go through. So some of us have adjusted category setting to uncheck required photo.) Anyway, what we're finding is that even though the simple checkbox is not marked "optional", people can still submit waymarks without checking this box. If a checkbox variable is "required" (i.e. not optional), why is possible to leave the simple checkbox unchecked and still submit the waymark?

I'm guess that the hundreds of e-mails (thousands?) over the weekend are lost? I've received nothing from Friday afternoon through Sunday afternoon and there's been some activity on my waymarks. Oh well.....

I've just formed a new group - 100 Year Old Churches - that seeks to waymark churches with sanctuary buildings that are at least 100 years old. These have to be functioning sanctuaries or former church buildings that are still being used for some purpose and open to the public. To join, follow this link: http://www.Waymarking.com/groups/details.a...b5-5ffc1a1a955d Anyone interested is welcome to join. We can hash out the details, but there have been too many dead-end discussions about churches and church categories without any actual categories being created. I figured I'd best get on it and do something. So, step up to the altar!

I used to live in Idaho, so I'm in.

I like the idea if it's possible to stop and safely photograph such things. Here in North Carolina, the state doesn't seem too big on putting up such termini signs. I think it important that any such category specify what kinds of "end of..." signs are allowed. You don't want to wind up with hundreds of run-of-the-mill "Dead End" signs in every podunk town. That'd be boring. Termini of state highways, interstates, turnpikes - that sort of stuff would be good. Let me know when you form a group.

Everyone should be aware that, for some reason, e-mail is out of commission on Waymarking.com. You will not get confirmations if you submit waymarks. Group Leaders and Officers won't get e-mails when new waymarks are submitted for their group's approval. We're on own own until this problem is fixed, since we can't even contact the Groundspeak crew. Group Leaders and Officers should manually check their categories for waymarks waiting for approval. The system appears to be fine otherwise. Waymarks can still be submitted and approved. Hopefully, e-mail will be back Monday. For us on the east coast, this may not be until afternoon. -sbk

Everyone should be aware that, for some reason, e-mail is out of commission on Waymarking.com. You will not get confirmations if you submit waymarks. Group Leaders and Officers won't get e-mails when new waymarks are submitted for their group's approval. We're on own own until this problem is fixed, since we can't even contact the Groundspeak crew. Group Leaders and Officers should manually check their categories for waymarks waiting for approval. The system appears to be fine otherwise. Waymarks can still be submitted and approved. Hopefully, e-mail will be back Monday. For us on the east coast, this may not be until afternoon. -sbk

Looks as if the e-mail problems won't be solved until Monday. In the meantime all Leaders and Officers should manually check their categories for waymarks waiting for approval. You will not receive a notification e-mail until this problem is fixed. Hopefully the e-mails are still in the server, but aren't going out. When the trouble is fixed, get ready for a landslide!

Thanks. That thread is sooooo long, didn't want to plow through it, but will. So e-mail from Waymarking is down, but geocaching is working. I checked the Bugs thread and no word from the techies about this. I presume they know. If not, it's the weekend now in Seattle, so we're SOL until Monday. (Gee, I hope not.) Will have to manually check waymarks to approve.

Thanks. That thread is sooooo long, didn't want to plow through it, but will.

I was surprised today to have no e-mails from Waymarking. I am Leader of three groups and a member of a few others. There were several waymarks to be approved in two categories I'm an officer in. Didn't get an e-mail about them. I am receiving e-mails from other senders, just none through Waymarking. I checked my profile in case a glitch occurred and my e-mail address had somehow changed. Everything looked fine. Anyone else? (I wonder what'll happen if I check "Enable email notification of replies?" if I Waymarking isn't sending me e-mails. Hmmm....)

Maybe a little! But my point was that the Fairy Hills Category didn't make it through peer review. Good. So it's not quite a slam dunk with peer review.

He's no good to us dead.

I'm unable to recreate the error. I suspect you may have encountered it while the site was being updated. Get back to me if this is still not working for you (as of 4/20/2006 4:50 PM PST). I continued to get the error. I thought it might be related to the default photo. I uploaded a photo and was then able to edit.

Is it just me, or did we get way off topic.

This is a flat out brilliant solution! If I had this capability, I'd run with it and avoid the unpleasantness. Jeremy, I hope the techies can make this a reality. And can I say that I've logged new waymarks and approved them and missed my own typo's. We are none of us perfect. I like the polite e-mail suggestion for now. Then hopefully officers can edit waymarks when this function is possible. (I wish there was some way to incorporate spell check into the submissions process.)

I wonder if any proposed categories - those that have a group, have been voted on by the group, then go to peer review - have ever been voted down. Does anyone know? Some that are getting approved make me wonder. I'm thinking about starting a completely bogus category - like "Solid Gold Decorative Kleenex Boxes" or "5000 Foot Tall Wind Chimes". I'll bet I could get a group together and get it approved.

I am managing a new category - World War I Monuments. I posted and approved the first waymark in the category: http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/details...db-fb79562ca751 Now, the system will not let me edit this one. If I try and edit, I get: Directory Listing Denied This Virtual Directory does not allow contents to be listed. Also, the directory listing is showing up on the home page under Newest Categories, but this shows a count of 0. Like this waymark isn't there. Something's fishy. bootron, Nate, Jeremy: Help!

Peer review is underway for World War I Memorials and Monuments. To reach the peer review page to vote (yes) on this category (and others): http://www.Waymarking.com/groups/peer_review.aspx Thanks!