Jump to content

The Blue Quasar

+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by The Blue Quasar

  1. Agreeing with those above. This issue is easy to reproduce just like was mentioned above. - iPhone 2022SE updated iOS - Official Geocaching App - Navigate to cache by clicking the car and picking Google Maps - Works fine until it has to recalculate the route, which is when the App seems to forget where it’s going. Navigates miles/kilometres away to random spot. - Issue does not happen with Apple Maps As I work in a courier capacity I use Google Maps to get to businesses and residential locations. It works flawlessly in that capacity. Only when it is called from Geocaching.com does it mess up. Ponder: Could it be an issue based on the GC Code at the end of the coordinates? Perhaps when it has to look back that causes the error just like when you use the link to Google Maps on the cache page. On an iOS device clicking on the Google Maps link on a cache page gives this N 49° 10.129 W 122° 34.390 (GC9P6X4) which the Google Maps App doesn’t understand, unless you manually remove the bracketed information. Thing I haven’t tested is what happens when using corrected coordinates. FWIW, this is in Canada…so it is affecting multiple countries
  2. Thank you for your critical analysis of this most recent submission that was accepted. While it is true that a significantly small portion of the community would be able to complete the requirements with ease using a photo of their success that was not related to the actual Waymark, many of the community would not have such a photo in their possession. As such they would either have to re-create the photo or if it doesn’t apply to their history with regard to education then they will have to cosplay to achieve the goal. Personally I do not see a double standard in the acceptance of this photo goal.
  3. Yup, you are right. I added it but it is for creation of a new one. It does not appear possible to create Visit requirements apart from suggesting it in the text. That's what I get for not being here for ten years. I didn't remember that there are no mandatory logging entries, which makes sense.
  4. I have added that as a required variable. Thanks for catching that.
  5. Perhaps a less sarcastic tone would yield better results. I will admit there are likely some that should be deleted. However, there are better ways to express your frustrations in a public forum where it appears that you would like instant updates.
  6. This is actually a great example of something that should be published. Unlike simply having your photo taken with an object, this is very difficult to arrange. Police Officers are not simply going to let someone sit in the backseat and get photographed, nor are they likely to role play a fake arrest. Try walking up to your average cop and say "Hey, I'm playing a photo game. Can I get my picture with you pretending to arrest me?" They might agree to standing together in a friendly pose, but not very often will a cop allow themselves or their car to be photographed in a mock criminal apprehension. The sample photo was obtained in a settling that allowed people to sit in the back seat. Kudos to the creator of this Photo Goal.
  7. Perhaps you are misinterpreting my post. Normally the Waymark CREATOR provides the coordinates. Not so in this category. While it is true that the creator does use the coordinates where they performed the Photo Goal, those that Visit do so at their own recorded set of coordinates not those of the listing. No one needs to come to my house to perform the Photo Goal for "Show Your True Colours". It can be done anywhere, they just have to provide the coordinates where they did it. Much the same as is done in the U-Haul Category.
  8. So, I'm sitting here tonight looking over the list of submissions since I resumed leadership. Here is a screen capture. Some of these I was involved with, some I wasn't. As there are only three officers, sometimes two NAY votes come in before I see it. Sometimes I am one of the two NAY votes. So please do not assume which officer voted for or against. Based on the above, some of these lack "ACTION" which is one of the main determining factors. It's not enough to just get your photo at a location or doing something relatively mundane or ordinary. It is true that it can be hard to put into words, especially since it can be subjective. And I'm not going to lie, having skimmed through ones that were accepted over the years that I wasn't here it is pretty obvious how people may have a case to make that their new ones are not much different than the older ones. However, we don't want this category to continue as uninspired. A good rule of thumb is "Would people see this idea and find it out of the ordinary enough that it would be viewed as weird?" Case in point... https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/wm2BQJ_Photo_Show_Your_True_Colours No one normally stands presenting a full sized flag of their home state/province to be photographed with. To an outside observer, they would think "Weirdo". Examples in the original category description are Some examples might include being photographed: Being hit in the face with a pie Riding a unicycle Arm Wrestling with a Nun in her Habit Having a bucket of pudding or water dumped on your head Dressed as a reporter and while holding a microphone interviewing a named politician Participating in a grape stomping Stand under a waterfall and use an umbrella Give a policeman a piggyback ride Compare these examples to the ones recently submitted and hopefully you can see the difference.
  9. As previously requested, please have patience with our group as we adjust and work towards being better. Some points from above: This is a long used argument from many aspects of life, not just Waymarking. While this is always true, it is not a valid way to determine if a proposed submission meets the criteria for inclusion in a category. That is a post-publish aspect after something becomes public. As a listing owner, just like in Geocaching, when a submission is proposed it comes with the agreement to monitor logs for compliance with the logging requirements. This is the unfortunate fallout of needing to resolve issues that had been raised about the very nature of this category. There were valid complaints brought forward, and to address them these past actions needed to be re-evaluated. Retractions happen in all parts of life, statements of correction etc. Thank you for saying so. Much appreciated.
  10. Exactly my thoughts. I have not had the pleasure of even seeing any of your caches (Fizzy Magic) but if you are crafting your own puzzles from the ground up then all the applause to you.
  11. Yes, honestly it would.... and those that remember me know that I will work to solve things, and if certain actions need to take place for the good of the game then that is what will happen. I think it would be best if any such list was sent to me privately along with reasons. Nothing is gained by throwing others under the bus publicly.
  12. Hi everyone. It's been a LONG time since I have spent any amount of time in Waymarking, and I transferred all of my Categories many years ago. I'm not going to lie and say that I am refocused on Waymarking, but I will say that I know the potential that it has always had and the only reason for my departure was the lack of interest by locals. With the recent addition of Adventure Labs it is obvious to anyone that Waymarking would be successful if it had an App and more importantly if Visits counted toward Geocaching Stats. As for Photo Goals, as the original inventor of that Category, I am willing to put some time towards making it work again and hopefully restoring consistency and fun to it. It is true that it is a tough Category and that is why the mandatory vote method was used. As I have resumed the leadership position, I will try to make it what I believe we all envisioned it could be. BUT, please bear with me as I need to relearn a lot about the details, coordinate with the Officers and maybe add some. I did read the now closed forum, and while it is fair to say that responses were not forthcoming, to my knowledge the only channel used was these forums. I had been back as an Officer for quite some time and no one raised any concerns with me directly. Considering that the Category shows that I was the creator one would have thought if answers weren't coming that someone would have contacted me directly. If I recall correctly, Photo Goals was a radical shift from the usual Category style. It was the first to employ "you provide the coordinates" which was intended to emulate the original Locationless Cache idea from pre-2005. But the content of the Photo Goals does need to be unique, of interest or challenge to others, and about all else fun. That is pretty subjective I know. Looking back over some recent submissions, several were accepted that maybe should not, some are fairly low goals, and some were accepted properly. The most important thing is to do something out of the ordinary that others would say looks like something fun to do. "Make a paper airplane" is not all that exciting, whereas "Fly a kite while on top of a 20+ story skyscraper" is. All I can do is say that we will try better, and expect people to offer entertaining activities that illustrate fun and pride, not the mundane and dull.
  13. Yup, that's what I got as well. What got me curious is the three other people that were previously Premium, didn't give a FP, and now are not Premium. Like I said in my reply to niraD, I know all five personally and none of them would have been basic members when they logged the cache which has always been PMO. I guess I just wondered why their valid finds were not included in the calculation. But yes, if the calculation is FPs divided by PMOs that gave FP at the time they found it, then it makes sense. And I appreciate not loosing percentage points when someone drops from PM to BM. Impressive that HQ took that into account.
  14. Yes, actually. I know all five of them personally.
  15. Generally I'm pretty good at math. This has me stumped. https://coord.info/GC7E7RJ has always been a Premium Member Only cache. It has 34 Favourite Points. It has been found 50 times. To me, that is 68% but the site says 72% which is too high. There are five players that were Premium Members that are currently Basic Members. 34 out of 45 would be 76% which is too high again. Of the five, two gave a Favourite Point and the other three did not. The only math that works is 34 Favourite Points were given by 45 current Premium Members plus 2 Past Premium Members, and the other three Past Premium Members who found it but didn't give a Favourite Point were ignored. 34 / (45 + 2) = 72.3 % I mean, I guess I should be happy that my cache shows 72%..... but it feels weird since that seems like a strange formula to use.
  16. When logging on the official app, once you choose to upload a photo you no longer can give a Favourite Point.
  17. That is like saying The Beatles can only have 150 songs in a streaming service because no one can listen to more than that in 24 hours. Netflix hosts thousands of hours of content. Libraries have thousands of books.... not all of them are accessed daily. How would Groundspeak determine that? If I didn't sign onto the website for six months but am getting the emails, how can anyone tell that there is a problem unless one gets reported. Groundspeak takes action on cache listings that have been brought to their attention, and does not simply go on "Search and Destroy" missions.
  18. A listing service cannot tell people that it is okay to remove any physical remains. Those were owned and placed by someone else. All the listing service can do is offer to host a page to share the details of it online, and remove that page from search results (technically GC could delete the page if they wanted, after all GC is hosting it, but they keep it for historic reasons) if the listing is no longer valid. In the same fashion, if people are concerned about abandoned caches then they should do whatever they feel is right without needing GC to comment on it. As it stands right now, to the best of my knowledge, GC doesn't tell people to put things out or to remove them. They archive the listing and suggest remains be picked up by the owner, as per the Cache Maintenance guidelines that the owner agreed to at the time of publication.
  19. @thebruce0 I have one in for Review in Niagara Falls, ON at "The Flying Saucer" It will be https://coord.info/GC87CXP when published.
  20. Perfect. Mostly one can agree with that, however when a finder logs a Found It but then goes on to say that they did not, most times people look at the last log and say "Yup, it was found" and that's it. They walk out to the cache after a false positive with an expectation of likely success. Allowing false finds also tells the community that actually finding the container and signing the logbook (at one time that was the core of the game) is now optional. Call me olde timey but I am from a time when ethics meant more than numbers, integrity meant more than stats, and honesty meant more than being inconvenienced.
  21. The guidelines do not allow for just anyone to act on behalf of the CO. In the case where the CO lives far enough away that they cannot perform maintenance themselves, the CO is to outline their maintenance plan BEFORE publication stating what individual will be taking care of the cache for them. See: https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=128&pgid=709 If you have a guideline that says otherwise, please provide the link. What you say here, snipped from above is 100% true However, the CO has the responsibility to maintain the cache themselves or by designated proxy established before publication. When a CO asks anyone else to maintain their cache for them, they are failing to meet the Cache Maintenance guidelines they agreed to in order to be published. In your example, the CO is in the wrong and has now broken the guidelines. In other words the guidelines prohibit the CO from asking you to change the logbook for them. Community maintenance is NOT an acceptable maintenance plan.
  22. Actually I do agree with you. And your example makes perfect sense. Just like the "the logbook was sopping wet so I added a piece of paper as a temporary fix" makes sense. And then adding a Need Maintenance log. At that point the CO should disable it until they can replace the logbook. But no, like you said people can vary the game as much as they want. It is the slippery slope though of when it goes too far. "I couldn't get near the cache due to the bees in the area" = you didn't find it "I saw the cache up in the tree about 40 feet, but I didn't climb up to sign it" = you didn't find it "I pulled out the logbook but my pen was tearing the soaking wet paper" = of course you found it... "As it turns out the cache was missing but the CO said I could log it found" = No, you didn't find it "I found the lid to the cache. It had camo tape on it that was chewed. The rest was gone." = you didn't find it It should be common sense what "Finding" actually means as well as "Signing the logbook". Did you locate and touch the container that was holding the logbook, and sign that logbook if possible? Sounds like a valid find to me.
  23. That's easy..... Cache Maintenance is something that the CO agreed to when they submitted their cache for review. https://www.geocaching.com/play/guidelines#ownerresponsibility These duties fall to the CO, no one else. A CO that cannot maintain their own cache shouldn't have a cache placed.
  24. If the logbook is unsignable to that extent, they should post a note and attach a Needs Maintenance, then come back after the CO fixes it. I know that sounds harsh. "Hey Billy, did you and Sally kiss?" "Well, I walked across the playground and she was there with her friends and well, she got shy and I was scared, but you dared me to, so ummm, I tried to kiss her but she turned her head away and I ended up kissing the back of her head. So I dunno if we kissed. I kissed her... does that count?" I don't think anyone would think that THEY kissed.
  25. I don't understand what you mean. How can someone log a find before signing the logbook? They haven't actually found it yet. Seems to me that the only way is to log the find after signing the log.
  • Create New...