Manville Possum
-
Posts
5685 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Manville Possum
-
-
11 hours ago, Benchmark Blasterz said:
If my dove waymark for the Co-Cathedral of the Sacred Heart is not appropriate for the category, then by all means it should be declined and I have no issue with that.
I had not meant to submit an inappropriate waymark, or cause any controversy or heartburn. I was told by a lady who worked at the cathedral that the window dove was representing the coming of the Peace of Christ and the Holy Spirit, so I thought it would be okay for the category.
I think I will stick 100% to doves with olive branches from here on in.
The problem is with the category as it is written, not your WM. I believe it's beak is broken and the olive branch is missing.
I do feel that doves representing the Holy Spirit should be allowed to the category, and it seems a simple fix.
-
.png)
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, BK-Hunters said:
Don't ya mean Armchair Waymarking from your front porch swing?
Keith
No, I mean my style of Waymarking from a vehicle. Windshield shots, shots that include my GeoMobile in the background, my style of a proof of visit photo.
-
9 hours ago, BK-Hunters said:
Heckuvan idea!!! If you use one and post some photos it'll make you a pioneer! In the not too distant future we will almost certainly have Waymarkers using drones regularly. They've gotten to be cheaper than a good camera. We might as well keep current, technologically...
EDIT - after a few moments thought I get why you asked that question here. VORs and NDBs are often on private land, well out in the country, well off the road. Drones are the perfect tool for the job as long as their picture quality is up to the task.
Keith
Remember when no cell phone photos were allowed in Waymarking because of poor quality?
It's all about the angle and sometimes tree top is better than ground level.
So if I can launch a drone from my vehicle and take photos, it is still Drive-By Waymarking and counts as another craft type.
-
1 hour ago, fi67 said:
It's been a while since I stopped bugging around with officers and begging for approvals. I post enough ones that are handled in time. And the rest will follow later, I don't care about a few days or even weeks. (Still, a big thanks to wayfrog. Great work! It's appreciated.)
But now I have received an approval email for a waymark that has been sitting in limbo for 960 days. That's a new record for me. Has anyone similar experiences?
No, and simply because I submit very few WM's and badger the snot out of whoever it takes to get an answer.
-
2 hours ago, steveid said:
I am using my iphone for coordinates is this wrong to do
There are apps for obtaining coordinates. I use Geocache placer on my Android.
-
I was not fully understand the category until elyob posted that link. There are a few in my region and photo access is not a problem.
So using that link has confirmed two sites, but there is another FAA something site locally I'm not seeing listed. I'll try to learn more about the subject.
-
So we are Waymarking something like this thing ? Correct?
-
38 minutes ago, fi67 said:
Good question, indeed. I am not against drone photos, as long as you took them personally. For me they are just as valid as any other camera.
But in this special case, I would be extra cautious. I can imagine that the operators of those stations have a different point of view.
BTW: The category has passed and I just activated it. It is supposed to become visible soon.
Yes, I would advise following all laws. Drones near Airports. Drones are becoming more popular and less expensive. Our local news uses them for filming and taking photos.
I'm thinking about using one for Waymarking.
I'm glad to see this new category. It's interesting.
-
18 hours ago, Manville Possum said:
Everything was normal and then the yellow triangle ! popped up but there was nothing in my review queue.
It hurts my eyes to look at it, so I will renew my PM to make it go away.
Systems normal today, the yellow triangle went away on it's own.
-
I delete finds with no signature on MY log book, and I don't accept throwdowns either.
-
1
-
-
Are drone photos accepted to this category?
-
Everything was normal and then the yellow triangle ! popped up but there was nothing in my review queue.
It hurts my eyes to look at it, so I will renew my PM to make it go away.
-
30 minutes ago, elyob said:
That screen has been the screen seen by basic members for some time now.
But I was a basic member before and that alert only popped up a few days ago. Was the a recent peer review just a few days ago?
-
45 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:
To me, being able to access PMO caches is probably the least useful benefit of Premium Membership.
PMO list is certain not the only thing a basic member would miss out on.
I'm in an area where the prolific hiders only list PMO, and had well over 100 myself. I only run a few PQ's a year, and I have never downloaded a public bookmark.
I used to renew just for the benefits on the Waymarking site. I do enjoy this hobby enough to renew my PM, but right now I'm giving it a test drive as a basic member.
And I do have enough PMO caches stored to keep me busy. I'm sure I could get by with only being a PM for a few months a year when I am most active, but yes. Premium Membership here is totally worth it to me.
-
22 hours ago, Torgut said:
Yeaps, it works, thanks :-)
Here is what I was talking about, and may not mean anything. If there was a recent peer review, then it may have triggered this pop-up alert, and it stays there now.
If I click on it I am taken to that page about becoming a PM for access to more features, ect. Totally different, and may just be systems normal for a basic member.
-
2 hours ago, Harley822 said:
Geocaching should make the first month free without having to make people ask for a code. The numbers according to Project GC are down and logic says that you have to consistently build your core base. As the core base gets smaller so do the caches, as the caches get smaller once again your core base does also. It is wonderful tool to discover new places and meet new people. Many people however grow frustrated with the basic features and some cannot afford the $30.
So what if there were no PMO caches? I changed about 50 listings to allow basic members access and I have not noticed an increase in finds.
I did let my PM expire and went back to using a GPS unit, but I do miss the lists feature.
Really, the only thing a basic member misses out on is PMO listings. The site is totally usable for free without the PM.
Right now I and only supporting this hobby by maintaining geocaches for others to enjoy for free.
-
1
-
-
20 minutes ago, Torgut said:
Please do, please. I was actually about to get a 3 months subscription as I will travel for a few months in multiple countries and was planning to get the PQ's for them, but if we are actually blocked to approve WM's I will put that on hold.
Sent.
-
10 minutes ago, Torgut said:
I will find out as soon as a new submissions arrives :-)
That could be months in my case.
I'm down to 2 categories that have little activity. I can send you a test WM if you need me to. I promise I won't rant in the forums when you reject it.
-
15 minutes ago, Torgut said:
Oh but the e-mail link doesn't work for me. It returns:
You do not have the authority to view this page.
Perhaps the submitter canceled the submission...
And the problem does not actually exist? Yeah, I understand that too well.
It's like a bad experience with a restaurant though, it's hard to get that customer's trust again. And we are under new management. 
-
37 minutes ago, Torgut said:
Hold on, what do you mean "unless the email breaks again"? I am unable to do it using the received e-mail.
I reviewed one yesterday via the email link. It's something on the home page that changed on my end.
-
1 hour ago, Torgut said:
Waymarking doesn't depend of anything, it is ABANDONED! It's is TOTALLY different. Geocaching.com is monitored, bugs are fixed, new features are added, website is improved.
Now, does Waymark needs hardware resources to run? Yes it does. How about the invaluable value of the domain as an asset, belonging to Groundspeak and built up by ALL OF US, for free?
Finally, if the idea is to add PM only features to Waymark, they already existed; blocking approval permissions to them it's an aberration. And again, just to highlight the main point: they do NOT work in Waymark for over 10 years, but they find the time to add new PM only permissions.
Waymarking is just an extra to the geocaching site and was designed for Premium Members. In the past, I enjoyed this site enough that I paid to use it's features.
This site is not very useful to me anymore, but I still use the geocaching site and can get around without a PM.
So unless the email breaks again, I can still review new WM's submitted to the 1 category I created and manage. If I have to renew my PM just to review new WM's they will not be reviewed.
-
31 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:
I read somewhere in the forums that, as a cache owner, if you delete too many logs and pictures that give away the location of your cache (spoilers), you could banned from geocaching.
Anyone have any experience with something like this?
Isn't that interesting.
That would not promote cache ownership, and I believe that the cache owners still have control over their listings. They belong to us, not the company. -
I have created one Wherigo, and it seldom gets any visits. I have found a few, but I'm not interested in them anymore. Wherigo and Waymarking seem to be getting buggier, just like I have seen with other sites when the code is outdated.
My experience as a Waymarker tells me that GS will do nothing with Wherigo. I think both sites are breaking, and that is only my opinion.
-
9 hours ago, BK-Hunters said:
Imagine that!!! It turns out that a sufficient amount of research can get a Waymark approved. Kudos for your perseverance.
Heck Fire - now you even have the makins' of another obscure category.
Keith
I would have thought that there would be an existing category for roadside curio's & oddities or known artists. I could not come up with anything on my own. I believe once that I knew exactly what I was Waymarking it was not just a stoopid sign with a religious message. I thought I had decent photos that show how big this thing is, turns out from research it 13 x 4 feet. Where it's placed was once the highway right of way that the artist called "No Man's Land" according to what I have read. This guy was kinda like Geocachers. He did not ask to place his works of art that he called "Sacred Signs". He placed them in the middle of the night and left muggle messages on them about going to Hell. Yes, this man was an artist in so many ways. But will there ever be a category here for him or others that place roadside art, I doubt it. But there should be because it is a art form by one artist.
I did find 2 other, maybe 3 groups that are interested in recording the locations of these Mays Signs. If you have ever drove through Harlan county, you will figure out why Mayes used concrete. It's bullet resistant.
So with Waymarking,... I'm not good at it. Telling the story of Mayes with a geocache placement and actually making an interesting visit to the site....... why do I bother fighting to have a WM published here? One of those same photos is getting quite a few views on flickr, and my only intent is to share a photo that I found interesting. Maybe I'm just sharing in the wrong group.
.png)
It's all about the angle and sometimes tree top is better than ground level.
Found but not Signed
in General geocaching topics
Posted
No signature, no find. Photo logs are not accepted. Most of these "I forgot my pen" logs are fake. I don't believe Groundspeak supports photo logs either and if I allow them my geocache listings can be archived by HQ.
My rule # 1 is if you don't sign a log is not to mention it in your online log for everyone to read.
My style of geocaching is to sign the log, take a picture of my signature and upload it with my finds log to the cache page