The Blue Quasar
-
Posts
1600 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by The Blue Quasar
-
-
3 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:
Wrong again. It states it right on the wamarking scavenger hunt FAQs:
Do I have to post a photo with my visit logs?
No, but it is highly encouraged. A good picture makes a waymark come alive, as well as gives you something to reminisce over as you look back on the hunts you completed.
Yet again, you are wrong. It says so right on the Scavenger Hunt page
QuoteScavenger Hunts
Waymarking scavenger hunts are sets of waymarks that are randomly selected for you based on criteria that you set up. The idea is to visit each of these waymarks, post a photo of you at the location, and then log your visit to get credit for each spot. If you successfully visit each waymark in the set, you will be given credit for having completed a set and will be credited on your profile page.
Gosh, would you look at that?!?! No really, you should....
-
On 2/20/2023 at 8:39 AM, Max and 99 said:
The owner cannot require it for scavenger hunts.
Scavenger Hunts are completed by Visiting Waymarks. Visiting Waymarks means meeting the logging criteria of the Waymark. Photos are not a direct element of Scavenger Hunts because that aspect is captured in the Waymarks themselves. Again, you are providing misinformation.
-
On 2/20/2023 at 4:10 AM, Max and 99 said:
No photo is required, regardless of the category visit requirement, if the waymark visit is for a scavenger hunt.
This ^^^ is incorrect. Many categories REQUIRE a photo, though apparently a handful don't.
On 3/18/2021 at 10:06 AM, iconions said:Most categories have specific rules for posting visits as they do for posting new waymarks. Follow the rules and the visit doesn't get deleted.
This ^^^ is 100% correct and the right way to respond.
-
11 hours ago, T0SHEA said:
The Blue Quasar, have you considered resigning as leader?
I see no reason to do so. Given the lack of constructive feedback to improve things, and posts from people saying things that they then pretend they didn't, or ask questions when the answer was already explained clearly in the category.... I'm not even seeing the problem, and no one has offered anything better or at all.
What I am seeing is complaints that people who are logging visits are not providing adequate photos. That is not for myself or the officers to address. The person who submitted the waymark is the one to deal with fake logs.
I've asked several times, if anyone has something that they can suggest to improve the category clarity then please offer it. Complaining about something, offering no alternative or solution, then claiming otherwise it just a waste of everyone's time. Either provide help or accept the category the way it is.
-
.png)
1
-
.png)
1
-
1
-
.png)
1
-
-
8 hours ago, elyob said:
It is unclear. Do 'I' have to be the person in the photograph performing the waymarkable action? Can I photograph some other person performing the waymarkable action?
As @Bear and Raggedshared, yes you must be in the photo. You can have others in the photo also completing the task, but you must be in the photo doing the task.-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Max and 99 said:
This is absolutely not true, and totally irrelevant to the conversation about the category rewrite.
You're the one that brought it up. I was merely trying to address it.
Your post: Posted Wednesday at 05:17 PM
Quote*Nowhere in the category description does it say you have to take a photo of yourself doing the task.
So on one hand you are commenting that the category description does not say anything about taking a photo of yourself, and then you say it is totally irrelevant to the conversation about a category rewrite.
One would think if we are attempting to fix the category that it would be any and all aspects that are unclear. You raised a concern about the lack of a photo requirement, I've replied showing that it is there, and now it sounds like you are saying it's not relevant. Why would you raise a concern that you think is irrelevant? To make matters worse you claim it is "absolutely not true" and yet the documentation shows that it is. Perhaps it is true that some Waymark listing owners are not enforcing or policing visits on their own Waymarks, but the category description has a crystal clear requirement of what is required for a valid visit log.
How is it my fault if someone else isn't checking logs on their own waymark? Do you expect me to check all of the logs on all of the waymarks in the category even though that is something the owner of the listing is supposed to do?
If you have something helpful, constructive and answers concerns to offer then I'm all ears. So far you have not provided anything that facilitates improvement or identifies where issues are arising,
-
16 hours ago, Max and 99 said:
*Nowhere in the category description does it say you have to take a photo of yourself doing the task.
Actually is it right in the description here as well.
Quote- Instructions for Visiting a Waymark in this Category:
- You must provide an image of yourself meeting the photo goal and you must also provide the coordinates where you were able to perform the photo goal. Further story about how you were able accomplish the photo goal and any other activities associated with it would be a great thing to include. We’d love to hear about your adventure!
-
15 hours ago, Max and 99 said:16 hours ago, The Blue Quasar said:
Can you help me understand what we are reading differently?
Exactly. That's part of the problem
Huh? Got to be honest, the description that I copied and pasted seems straight forward.
QuoteThis is about creating a challenge for people to DO things, and not really about the location. But Visitors will log where they were able to DO the challenge!
This category is NOT about finding things at all, at least not ones that are static. It is about ACTIONS!
What in there is not stating that people must DO an Action?
15 hours ago, Max and 99 said:*Nowhere in the category description does it say you have to take a photo of yourself doing the task.
It says it clearly in the quoted blue text above. Visitors will log where they were able to DO the challenge. Every Waymark requires a Visitor to upload a photo, not just this category but all categories. Why would this one be any different? In fact, if anything it seems the only way to visit a Waymark.
I genuinely want to help, but am struggling to understand your responses as they don't seem related to what I've said previously.
-
1
-
-
The response to the quoted section does not appear to match
QuoteQuoteCan you provide a link to the Waymark you are mentioning? As officers in the group, we are not perfect and only hope to improve from learning as much as we hope hopeful participants also learn
.
Vote comments:
[nay] Their is action but their is nothing about a location that would lead one to ride a unicycle.
[yea] Definitely a yes for me on this one!
[yea] Since this is something that would take some learning, timing and skill for the inexperienced I think this is suitable.
[nay] Don't think this works as it requires special skills.
[yea] Isn't this one of the examples given as a possible waymark?
These 'vote comments' do not provide context since they do not reference something specific as requested. It is unclear what you are trying to demonstrate.
-
23 hours ago, Max and 99 said:
The category description does NOT state you are required to take a photo of yourself DOING something.
This confuses me ^^^^
The category description says this
QuoteThe focus of this Waymarking Game is to encourage people to perform actions and be photographed doing so. The actions should be fun ones that would attract attention from others in a confused or 'rolling of the eyes' kind of way.
This is about creating a challenge for people to DO things, and not really about the location. But Visitors will log where they were able to DO the challenge!
This category is NOT about finding things at all, at least not ones that are static. It is about ACTIONS! We want to see people doing crazy fun things. We want to see people doing something specific but with an item that is only at a spot for a brief period of time.
Can you help me understand what we are reading differently?
As for this
23 hours ago, Max and 99 said:The Waymarking was declined again. The reason was:
I have had a good look around your site, and while it appears to be a worthy challenge, this waymark does NOT meet guidelines for inclusion in this category.
This category specifically requires you to take a photo of yourself DOING something, not achieving something. Simply taking a photo does not qualify. Neither does fulfilling any sort of 'challenge.'
If I am right in which submission that was, all I could see what to take a picture of yourself with a certain page loaded on screen. I did ask for clarification but I don't believe any was returned.
If memory serves, four new Waymarks have been published in the last 7 days. Of the rest, which are also four, that were not published one was denied three times for the same reason, one was denied twice for being based on a single location, one was denied once for being based on a single location, and the last one was denied once for lack of action on the participant. To illustrate further, the last one was similar to "take a photo of a cat looking down on you".
Looking at the four published ones, I very much like the 'getting eaten by a mailbox' one. The person in the picture really got into it. The 'grab the bull by the horns' is okay, I do wish they were visibly acting up more than just standing there. 'Pilot a boat' while some might say is a common thing, they made it detailed with that you must be at the tiller and the boat must be in motion. The last one 'view something through a microscope and explain it' is not something people can do all the time, it needs special equipment and to be able to take a photo of what the microscope sees. All four of these have and show people DOing things.
Again, I'm not trying to change the past and if I were to go backwards in time I would only go back to the start of 2023. I'm in the process of trying to review the reviews before I stumbled back into this last week. I know one of the other officers personally, and the other seems quite capable as well. I'm sure all three of us would like to be able to serve the community as best as possible.
-
2
-
-
This may apply to other or maybe all category groups, and being honest my knowledge on this stuff is very rusty.
When a Waymark is submitted there are three options for the officers to choose from
- Accept
- Deny
- Vote
The first two are pretty straight forward and obvious. It's the third option, VOTE, that I am referring to.
Since the officers of Photo Goals are supposed to ALWAYS send submissions to a Vote, what happens next?
- What if only one officer casts a vote and then a set amount of time goes by? Does that vote become the deciding one?
- What if two officers vote but each vote differently? What happens in the case of a tie?
I'm asking because I am looking over the history of voting, noticing some interesting results and trying to draw connections between voting and not voting.
-
Hello all,
The "Photo Goals" category might benefit from the collective knowledge of the Waymarking community at large to improve its description. This forum is being provided to facilitate a way for us to 'rewrite the concept' in a more clear language and ultimately reduce confusion and frustration for everyone that would like to participate in what was intended to be a fun activity.
I think it best if I start off by opening the floor to your productive comments. Comments that are designed to improve the category. This is not an area to air grievances about the past, only to serve as a potential reset point for success going forward.
So, with that in mind, where should we start?
-
3
-
-
7 minutes ago, T0SHEA said:
Would you consider a rewrite?
Always.
7 minutes ago, T0SHEA said:Perhaps start a new topic in Recruiting and Category Proposals so others can discuss a possible solution.
This is a great suggestion. I will do that now. Please give me a few minutes to author that.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, Max and 99 said:
I submitted a waymark to this category that exactly matched one of the suggestions in the description. Yet when it went to group vote, as all waymarks in this category do (I was told), not all officers approved the idea.
Can you provide a link to the Waymark you are mentioning? As officers in the group, we are not perfect and only hope to improve from learning as much as we hope hopeful participants also learn.
In the past few days we have had several new submissions that are only attainable at a fixed, single point of latitude/longitude. These will never pass review. To give an example "Capture the CN Tower in an OK symbol." The CN Tower is a fixed point object, hence a decline vote would be cast.
-
15 hours ago, BeayPepe said:
As we like to take things with humor, we leave you a link to a geodesafio that we have created: https://geodesafios.es/geodesafio-express-crear-un-Waymarking/
We hope you enjoy it!
As the creator and infrequent participant in the category I can assure you that for this suggestion I really tried to understand how the website you offered worked. Perhaps it was a language barrier on my part.
The "Photo Goals" category is reportedly one of the most difficult to understand according to many people. And perhaps my inability to adequately express the intention is to blame, or it could be others trying to suggest ideas that they believe match but the officers do not agree.
Some key points from the above comments are worth exploring. Waymarking just like Geocaching uses the premise that previously accepted listings do not indicate that the same will happen. It is more accurate to say that the guidelines are updated from time to time. Submissions are evaluated using the current guidelines, not those of the past. In short, we learn and adapt so that we improve the game and not continue to accept things that perhaps should not have been accepted. Isn't that how life works? Even things that we okay, when we find better ways we stop using the old ways.
What was the point of the Photo Goal that you submitted? I honestly couldn't figure it out. I know there was an aspect of going to your website. Was the hope to attract people to your website? Was it for others to participate in the activities that are hosted on that website? The bigger question still remains of "What is the goal that a Waymarker is supposed to be doing?"
As an example, today there is a Photo Goal in for review where you need to take a photo of what you see through a microscope and describe it. Personally I love that. It is clear and easy to understand, it can be done anywhere and is about doing something and more importantly not something mundane. Also today there was a submission which I will describe using a different target... take a selfie at this specific post office. Clearly that isn't what we are looking for. The location is a single point, there is no "doing" action.
DOING is a huge aspect of the Photo Goals category. People should be "statically animated" like acting out an activity.
Examples:
- Good: Making an Italian dinner dressed up in chef's attire with a candlelit formal table table for two in the background.
- Bad: A pot of Mac and Cheese on a stove top
- Good: Build a house of cards of at least three levels.
- Bad: Take a photo of yourself playing poker.
-
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
-
1
-
-
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.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Max and 99 said:
I logged out then back in and I don't see anything different. To clarify when I go to visit a photo goal, I often miss the box that says recommended additional coordinates.
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 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:
I personally find it so easy to miss the coordinate entry for photo goals when I visit.
I have added that as a required variable. Thanks for catching that.
-
On 3/14/2021 at 12:14 AM, Punga and Paua said:
Oooops, your waymark is not such a perfect example afterall. Nothing unusual about having a photo taken with a flag. But it is 'weirdo' though, the number of Country flags in there when you specifically said "National Flags will not be accepted". ...even hand-held small flags when "they MUST be full sized! " Shouldn't you, as the waymark owner, manage your goal visits and delete those that don't comply?
Or, should this Photo Goal be declined too, just like the others? And where's the ACTION?
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.
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, Punga and Paua said:
How did Get "Arrested" pass the vote, sitting in a car and having a photo taken?
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.
-
1
-
2
-
-
On 3/14/2021 at 7:49 PM, ScroogieII said:
' It was the first to employ "you provide the coordinates" '
Not really - ALL Waymarkers are required to provide (correct) coordinates.
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.
-
1
-
-
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.
-
2
-
1
-
As previously requested, please have patience with our group as we adjust and work towards being better.
Some points from above:
On 3/11/2021 at 10:23 PM, Punga and Paua said:No-one is forcing you to do the goal, if you don't like it, don't do it.
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.
On 3/12/2021 at 9:37 AM, Max and 99 said:The wording of the photo goals is driving me nuts. I'm guessing 1% of visits do what is asked.
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.
On 3/11/2021 at 9:42 PM, Punga and Paua said:The Past Activity page makes interesting reading, so many Declines then Approves then Declines again, for the same goal, it looks like no-one knows what they're doing!
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.
On 3/11/2021 at 11:21 PM, Max and 99 said:I absolutely agree with this. But first, we as a community have been discussing in the forums how to make the category better and more consistent. Then we can individually decide which photo goals waymarks we want to participate in.
But I think consistency and clear guidelines are what needs to be addressed first by the officers. Not an easy task.
Thank you for saying so. Much appreciated.
-
1
-
.png)
.png)
.png)
One would think if we are attempting to fix the category that it would be any and all aspects that are unclear. You raised a concern about the lack of a photo requirement, I've replied showing that it is there, and now it sounds like you are saying it's not relevant. Why would you raise a concern that you think is irrelevant? To make matters worse you claim it is "absolutely not true" and yet the documentation shows that it is. Perhaps it is true that some Waymark listing owners are not enforcing or policing visits on their own Waymarks, but the category description has a crystal clear requirement of what is required for a valid visit log.
Logs without photos
in General Waymarking Topics
Posted
Irrelevant.... while there may be conflicting statement in the description of Scavenger Hunts and their FAQ, the actual requirement to log a valid Visit to a Waymark still stand. Those are the deciding factor when it comes to posting a photo.