Team Sieni

Very slow at the moment. To the point of not being usable.

Ahh. Artists studios. Thanks. I think this suggestion would be redundant. And if ever I'm in Edmond, OK, I'll be sure to visit there. Unlikely, but if I am ... I was visiting glass galleries and hot shops in Sweden recently. If I'd had "artists studios" in mind I'd have taken more pics and co-ordinates. I did find a glassblowing related mosaic, though:WMMF55 You know I'm getting a sense of deja vu. I bet if I searched the forum archives I'd find that I made this suggestion a few years ago and came to the same conclusion.

Hello. I've not been on the WM forums for a while. I have been Waymarking though. Here's a category idea. As a lover of glassblowing I'm wondering if this would make a good category. A "hot shop" is a workshop equipped for working with molten glass. It will contain at the very least a furnace containing molten glass. It will probably also contain "glory holes" (gas powered reheating chambers) and "lehrs" (cooling ovens). This category is for hot shops that are open to the public at least some of the time, where glassblowers can be seen demonstrating their work, and possibly where the public can try glassblowing. This includes commercial factories, provided that: (a) Glassblowing is done manually (with a blowing iron) and (b.) public tours are available. Other workshops that use molten glass, but not for blowing (eg for casting) will be accepted provided they are open to the public. Where a temporary workshop has been set up for an event this will be accepted. Is this too narrow? Would perhaps "craft workshops" be better, to include open-to-the-public places where the public can see blacksmiths, potters, wood turners etc at work? In fact is there already such a category? The key thing here is demonstrating the craft to the public. Any thoughts?

Uh oh. I just had a couple of instances where a WM displayed a blue map (just sea) but then showed the correct map on refresh. Could this be the start of a the age of the "sea problem"? I hope not

What a nice surprise! Thanks!

Still the same: Always get the Seattle map first time. Always get the proper map on refresh. I'm convinced that it's not browser specific as I get it on my Android tablet, my little Win 8 netbook and my clunky old laptop. All exactly the same. If GS can't reproduce it - and many of us can, very reliably, why not contact one of us as a guinea pig? Arrange a time, one of us will use a test GS server if that is possible and the developer can tweak the timing parameters, or try to do the map resizing in-line rather than spinning it off in another thread, or other tweaks. By "tweak" I mean, for example, the map object is first created n the function initMap centred on Seattle, and then in the function mapItems it gets re-centred on the waymark location. Why not create it centred on the Waymark in the first place?

Unscientific report: Of the last ... say ... 15 WMKs I've reviewed I've seen the Seattle map 100% of the time on first view, and the proper map has appeared when I click refresh 100% of the time. There may have been one or two where this didn't happen, but I don't remember it. Harrumph.

Yes, they have acknowledged the problem. In this very thread, in fact:here But no, it hasn't been fixed.

Wow ... I go away for a couple of weeks, and when I get back everything's changed. No, wait ... I mean, everything's exactly the same. Problem still unresolved.

For me here are the steps: Go to www.Waymarking.com Click a waymark, any waymark, from the most recent list. The map is of Seattle. Click refresh. The map shows the WM location. I just tried and it always happens with IE 11.0.9600.16476 but does not with Chrome 32.0.1700.102 I'm running Win 8.1 pro. On my Android 4.4.2 tablet using Chrome 32.0.1700.99 It happened the first time I tried, but not subsequently. Make of that what you will. If you can't reproduce it, maybe it's because of your location - are you perhaps inside the Groundspeak firewall or something like that? (I know nothing about networking, so please don't pick me up on wrong terminology ) Maybe clear all cached stuff from your browser then pop outside to a coffee shop (I believe you have a few in Seattle) and connect via wifi there, and see what happens then. If you can't make it happen, go up to some random person drinking coffee and browsing the web and shout HEY, LOOK OVER THERE! then grab their tablet/laptop and try it on there. My guess is that it's something to do with timing. Which is why it can be so unpredictable. A refresh on a newly loaded page pretty much always works. A refresh on a page that has been loaded but not used for a while doesn't -0 and can revert the map from a good one back to seattle Do you have any delays in there - that wait for the api to load or something. If so, try increasing them. Excuse my rambling. Feel free to ignoire me

You're quite right Bruce. I knew there was a sane explanation there. So all that needs doing is either placing the icon a few pixels to the left, or using a different icon that has the pointer in the middle, not on the right hand side.

I find that I typically get Seattle, but if I hit refresh, I get the map. (IE11 on W8) Here's something else odd. If I zoom out, the little marker gets further and further East of the actual location. Take a random WM (one that you know). Zoom out, then zoom out some more. The little marker corresponds to locations on the map further and further East. Eventually it will indicate another state, or another country, or it will be in the sea. Has it always been like this?

One little think I'd like ... an email saying "Cream Cheese Sculptures has been submitted to peer review" (Other categories are available) So I'd know when a new one had come up.

The way I play the game (which - by the way - is the BEST way, and everyone else is WRONG ) is that for the categories that I'm really interested in: if I find one, I take pictures an co-ords. When I get home I waymark it. If someone else has beaten me to it, I log a visit. For categories I'm less interested in, I may or may not bother with the visit. I do use WM.com to scope out an area before visiting, but I don't think I've ever taken the coords from WM.com and then set out expressly to visit a WM.

There's a joke about an old man who, when asked for directions to some place, thought for a while then replied "Well, I wouldn't start from here". If we were able to wind Waymarking back, I'm sure we could come up with a much more rational breakdown of categories for churches and religious buildings in general. But we are starting from where we are, and to be honest I don't know the best way forward at all. My heart sinks when I see a new category for a particular sub-sub denomination up for peer review. I don't feel I can decline them because there is plenty of precedent, but IMO we've got ourselves into a bit of a muddle as things stand. Not a very helpful post, I'm afraid. But I wouldn't start from here.

I have an interesting conundrum. It's a bit long. Bear with me, please. I am an officer on the Birdwatching Locations category. As it happens the only active officer. Obviously a birdwatching location can be huge (eg a lake, a marsh) so we have a "one waymark per site" rule in the category. If a site has many locations, eg several birdwatching hides/blinds/birding huts (call them what you will: "blind" is the N American term, "hide" is the British term) then the firs WM on the site takes precedence. A while back I received a waymark showing a picture of a hide. It was close to an existing WM showing a picture of a different hide at co-ordinates not far away, with a very similar name, so I declined it on the "one waymark per site" rule. The Waymarker resubmitted, saying that there is no hide at the location of the older WM. (Although the older WM shows a photo of a hide), and that the new WM should take precedence. My view is that the site itself has been waymarked, even if there is a query over whether the hide pictured in the original WM may have gone, or maybe the co-ords of the original WM were incorrect. But as the SITE has been waymarked we shouldn't accept a new WM. So ... I put it up to vote. But as I'm the only active officer, my nay vote was the only vote. So it was declined. Now the WM has been resubmitted again, restating that there is no hide at the original location, and the local ranger agrees with this, and suggesting that the original WM should be removed. I haven't changed my personal opinion that the site has already been WM'd. But as I'm the only active member of the group, declining it again would seem a bit dictatorial. Putting it up to vote didn't really achieve anything. So I'm asking the wider community. So ... what should I do. Decline? Contact the author of the original WM to see if the co-ords are wrong? Or what?

Yup, I like the idea.

I hope they will stay as they are, so the badge hunters can write just 350 "visited while geocaching" logs and go away. You cynic.

Yesterday the waymark was showing zero visits, if I clicked on view visits & comments I saw nothing, and my pictures weren't part of the gallery. Today it's still showing zero visits but if I click on view visits & comments I can see my visit and my pictures are in the gallery (as described by Country Wife above) Definite bug in there somewhere. By the way I was getting quite a few errors of SQL transaction not useable (or whatever the message is, I don't remember exactly) yesterday when I submitted the visit. Maybe it only got half saved - if there are two distinct transactions, one to save the visit and another to update the WM, and the second failed.

How odd. I can't see it, even after refreshing, on two different machines. I'll leave it for now.

I just logged a visit for this waymark: http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WME2B6_Margate_Surf_Boat_Memorial_Kent_UK Immediately after logging it I went back to the waymark, but my visit wasn't shown. Perhaps I forgot to press submit, I thought. So I went to re-start the visit logging process, but I get a red message "you have already visited this waymark". But the WM is showing zero visits.

A while back a Waymarker logged a visit on one of my waymarks dating back to his childhood. He'd just had some old photos of a school trip digitised. He emailed me first to check and I was happy to see the visit.

The Metro (UK morning free newspaper) had a double page spread on photographers' rights this week. Linky including a cut-out-n-keep advice list. With the olympics coming up it seems that private security firms are overstepping the mark in attempting to stop people taking photographs. The advice they give (UK specific) is 1.Challenge it! Ask under what law you are being stopped. As long as you are on public land you are allowed to take as many pictures as you like. 2.If you can, record or film the incident on your mobile phone. 3.Take down the details of the officer or guard approaching you so you can make an official complaint afterwards. 4.The police cannot stop you unless they ‘reasonably suspect you of being a terrorist’ and cannot seize any equipment or photos unless it contains something which ‘the officer reasonably suspects may constitute evidence that the person is a terrorist’. If they do, they must provide paperwork detailing what has been taken. 5.Under no circumstances can any photos or footage be deleted during a search. This website is also interesting. http://photographernotaterrorist.org/

There is Cave Entrances (Artificial) That would cover things like mining adits and so on. That said, I have sometimes thought that there was nowehere to waymark active tunnels, but then they are often inaccessible or dangerous as a lot don't allow pedestrians (road tunnels, rail tunnels) but it's worth considering. Sometimes they will find a home in other categories, eg: WMDE9A Thames Tunnel Rotherhithe UK (Engineering Landmarks) WMDKJB Rotherhithe Tunnel Tunnel Approach Rotherhithe London UK (Freestanding Arches). WM46FR Greenwich Foot Tunnel Greenwich England UK (Official Local Tourism Attractions),WMDHTG Cattle Creep Cosgrove Northants (UK Historical Markers). WMZ2K Greywell [canal] tunnel eastern portal (Cave entrances artificial) If we take out active road and railway tunnels on safety (and boringness of picture) grounds, and pedestrian underpasses (no wow factor at all), abandoned train tunnels and "Cave Entrances Artificial" (redundancy) ... what are we left with? I was undecided when I started writing this, but I'm erring towards "nay" now.

This story has a happy ending WME1Y8 Ngoma Kachikau Road Commemoration and also WME4BT Road Completion Marker VT21 Torniontie Muonio Finland ... and they all lived happily ever after.