silverquill

Sorry for the lag here! I thought I had a good group of active officers for this group to share the reviewing load. I'll check with them and recruit some new ones of necessary. I just have not been able to be as active in Waymarking as I would like -- a combination of moves, work, family and church that have filled most of my time. Mostly good stuff, but it all has limited me. I try to check in frequently, but there are periods... I will go through the groups where I'm leader to make wure i have better coverage. Those where I am not leader, but maybe one of the few active officers will be more difficult, but I will do my best. Thanks for the note from Lumbricus!! (Caught me at home on this U.S. holiday, taking care of a sick family). ~~Larry (siverquill) Danvers, MA

This is always a difficult question at this point in Waymarking, but has always been problematic -- how to slice the pie! ONE category for ALL restaurants? General groups? Specific brands? We have both of the latter two category types for eating establishments. Then, after all this, do we fill in the gaps with a catch-all "everything else" category? Doesn't make much sense to me. A good category should have a specific focus that has enough merit to stand on its own and meets the four primary criteria. I crated Chinese Restaurants because almost every country has some. Even Haiti had a good one! I'd love one for Korean restaurants since I lived there recently for five years (I'd exclude ones actually in Korea, of course) and I love to find them here in the U.S. But, I'm not sure they have a global distribution that would justify a category. Same deal with Tex-Mex, a largely U.S. phenomenon. Then, there is the current sentiment biased against ANY commercial categories. I don't fully agree with that, but I do understand the reasons for that point of view. So, bottom line is -- If someone wants to create one of these categories, post it on the forum for comment, and then see how it does in peer review.

Sure, there might be some overlap. I know there are a lot of these signs in the Oregon Historical Markers category, for instance. But, I think it is a clear enough focus for a category that would stand on its own merits. Having clear guidelines would be essential for this category. I would like to see a requirement that the text of the sign be included in the long description, because that would make the waymarks searchable the web search engines and thus make this information available to the world. It is one of the ways Waymarking can make a valuable contribution to the body of knowledge.

1. Great idea for a new category that fits in with other similar ones. 2. Omnibus, catch-all categories are generally a bad idea. Each category should have a specific focus and stand on its own merits without reference to other categories. I think this is especially true where there are some existing categories. So, some get their own category and others just get lumped together in some "master" category? To define a category as, "Everything but . . . . " is usually not a very logical way to develop a category. I know we have a crazy quilt already with categories that intersect in some bizarre ways, but when we can avoid this, I think we should. Let's take an example - bridges. I see categories for at least twelves specific type of bridges. I find this a lot more interesting than having just ONE category for ALL bridges. Then, let's say after the sixth bridge category was created someone said, "Let's just combine all remaining types of bridges into one big category?" The other six would not exist -- a great loss in my estimation. Even with that, not ALL bridges have a category. Some just aren't remarkable enough to deserve a waymark, unless someone comes up with another clearly defined category. 3. Global criterion. I have written about this before, but it is still misunderstood. The intent is not to ARBITRARILY limit a category to a geographical area. In it's simplest form it would be something like, "US waterfalls." That is obvious as a restrictive category. Sometimes this is justified, however, such as historic markers or benchmarks where geographic restrictions make sense. Sometimes it is easy to broaden a category, however. One example is Auto Clubs. It could be written as just AAA Clubs, a largely U.S. organization, but it was easy to expand this to include similar travel clubs in other world areas. Just because a certain category topic is confined largely to one country or area is NOT a reason for its failing the global criterion. In this case, FOE may not be as international as the Rotary Club or Lions Club does not mean it is not a viable category. I'd love to see this one go forward.

Waymarking necessarily had to take a back seat in my life in 2015. That was really hard for me. Though my schedule continues to be full, it is closer to "normal" than it has been, so I can be more regular with Waymarking. Fortunately, most of my categories had active officers who were able to carry the ball. Oh, across several location moves, I've had an issue with my email which I haven't totally solved, so access to my Waymarking email account is still disrupted.

And done with true class!

A very ambitious undertaking, Bruce! I'll do my best to keep up with cats where I'm a reviewer. Life has been hectic for me in other ways, but I think I'll be able to resume a more normal schedule. Still having some tech issues with my email. Keep us posted.

Great achievement, but more than the number -- the consistently high quality!! When I see a BK Hunter waymark in the queue, I know it will be done right and with a little extra!! Have a fantastic trip!!

Checking coordinates depends on a lot of factors. I do look at the location on the map in the waymark for general accuracy. But, unless I have some reason to suspect inaccurate coordinates, I don't zoom in. Even then it is often difficult to determine accuracy, depending on the point. Commercial categories are ones I'm less likely to check. Addresses within a city are difficult to determine on a map. As has been pointed out, the maps are not accurate either, and they are outdated. The building where I lived in Korea was at least five years old, but did not appear on any satellite views. Occasionally it is discovered, as has been indicated in the start of this thread, that a particular waymarker consistently submits waymarks with coordinates that are highly inaccurate, and so I will check those more closely. And I will decline them if needed.

Got the edits for McDonalds, Amateur Radio Repeaters, and I think a Sculpture Garden. I'll check on the Water Towers, but I didn't get any edits for that category. I've had to get a new computer and haven't been able to configure my Waymarking email to it. I may have to create a new address.

It is nice to see this category getting some momentum. I'm not familiar with the benchmark system, but it appears that you have defined the category well to fit the unique structure in Belgium. The English still needs some polishing, and I'd be glad to help with that. Your comments about Google translator and other on-line translation programs makes me laugh. The results are never good enough to be used, except to get the general meaning of a sentence or paragraph. And, when it comes to Asian languages, the results are often incomprehensible. We could always tell when our students in Korea were using one of these translators! Anyway, I think you are almost there!

Tough one. I think this may have been one of the original Groundspeak categories. The current category leader has obviously abandoned Waymarking. 2012? The second in line is our own Groundspeak lacky, bootron. Sean has other priorities these days. I would try Scrambler390. He used to be more active. But, it is a category that clearly needs some more active officers. There was a designated person to notify in the case of nonresponsive categories, but that person left, then there were rumors he/she was back, and someone else was designated. And, that isn't documented anywhere. But, there is intervention to replace a leader in a situation like this. The normal procedure of promoting from the regular members doesn't work because you need at leas one active officer to put a name up for vote and then enough officers voting to make it happen! Hope you can find a solution.

Ho! Yep, this is a category where one can rack up some numbers, but they are good numbers representing nuggets of history. Some historic districts have hundreds of contributing buildings. There are at least several in Massachusetts with thousands! Trying to find an inventory of them is often the challenge though. Of course right now they are all buried under about eight feet of snow. Boston has set all-time records for snow fall this month, and did that in about two weeks! You're doing a great job with your historic buildings, so keep it up! Bruce has had to slack off a bit, but is still getting a lot of exercise on his bike.

Relocated Structures? Well, I guess it was never located in the first place. I guess we have to face the fact that not every interesting thing in the world can be waymarked. I do see similar things around -- large outdoor playhouses that are usually on private property. Or, they are part of a park play structure. Want a "miniature church" category? I have an interesting one from Korea I could submit.

That is truly remarkable! I wonder if there is a way to pull out visit statistics from Groundspeak? I would conjecture that you may be the world leaders for visits!

Sorry. I've intentionally been putting off making a decision on this waymark. Since it falls outside of the established parameters, I wanted to see if I could legitimately find a way to include it. I've included an explanation in my review. The other officers will usually put these new ones to a vote. Actually, this category does not get much traffic these days outside of a handful of people who like to post here. I think it filled a need at the time, but with all commercial categories falling out of disfavor, there isn't as much interest in the regional chain categories that I created. By the way, I really don't check my email for Waymarking frequently, because I operate from the web for most all of my activity, and nearly all of the emails generated to that address are routine notices. I guess I need to check for the personal messages more often. My apologies.

I wonder if there would be any way to separate the exceptional from the mundane. I doubt it. This gets into the purely subjective. Who determines what is exceptional and according to what criteria? Some of these exceptional ones are on the National Register of Historic Places. One NRHP Historic District, at least, includes hundreds. (So all of those have a category.) So, many of the exceptional examples may have other categories they could be placed in.

Bingo is whatever you want it to be. There is nothing official about any of it. To the best of my recollection, it started out as completing an entire horizontal row on the grid. Closing in on 8,000 waymarks, and I've yet to do that, and am not real close. If someone wants to work on a 3 X 3 or 4 X 4 block, that's fine too. Vertical rows would be a possiblity, too, but probably more challenging. Filling in the calendar can also be a goal. Finally filled in the holes on mine this year, so at least one waymark posted for each calendar day. What I really want to do is fill in the map! I have too many blank states, and, well, look at all those countries! I'm pretty sure I'll add at least one new one this year, but I'm not sure about states. I've also been able to add a few categories to my "century club," categories with at least 100 waymarks. Looking to expand that list in the year to come. One of the beauties of our hobby is that there are so many ways to play the game!

Someone bumped this thread. Sorry I missed this question. It is not that YOU don't understand; it is that someone else doesn't understand. I think it just takes some patience to explain things, because we can all make mistakes and can have gaps in our understanding. As you know, I've made my share. The more you do, the more chances for mistakes. I would take the time to explain that this is a waymark coming through the uncategorized waymark system. One of the reasons Groundspeak created that function was to encourage collaborative work. We also have an "edit" function where another person can suggest an edit for a waymark created by someone else. These go to an officer for review and are usually to correct minor errors, but they can add material as well. In the case of photos, ANYONE can log a visit and add photos to the gallery after the waymark is published. I suppose the waymark could delete these, and officers with edit privileges can so so as well. There is a lot of flexibility in the way waymarks are created, reviewed and edited. This means there is potential for misunderstanding, mistakes and even abuse, I suppose. But, if we communicate with each other and offer some grace when things go wrong, I think we are a stronger community and can feel good about what we do and who we are.

Hi, Tom! Well, in terms of number of waymarks posted, 2014 was not my best year. That was mainly due to starting a new job that sucked away a lot of time and emotional energy. So much for retirement, huh? Same job, but I think I have a better handle on it and will be able to devote some more time to working down that backlog. Still adding to that queue and keeping up with reviewing waymarks. I know have two nephews in the KC area. I thought I was going to be there for a wedding, but they decided to have it at the bride's hometown in Illinois, so I traveled there to perform the ceremony. Snagged some interesting waymarks, of course! But, one of these days I'll be in your neck of the woods again and we,ll touch base. Had dinner with Bruce and his lovely wife a couple of years ago. Thanks for all of the high quality waymarks! It is always a pleasure to see them and add them to the Waymarking library. Keep 'em comin'!

For waymarks in general, I am in favor of at least two required photos - a close-up view and an overview. Without the wider angle, it is difficult to get a perspective of the object, building or site. It is not difficult to add that second photo. The close-up is necessary to appreciate some detail. This is especially true, as you point out, with small object such as signs and head stones, not only to aid in location, but just to appreciate the surroundings. For any cemetery category, I also try to include a photo of the cemetery entrance and/or sign. It is just part of giving the best overall presentation of what we are Waymarking.

I agree. Of course in some places these are nowhere to be found. In other places they are ubiquitous. Pasadena, California, would be one example. There is an entire district with hundreds of homes designated as the Bungalow Historic District. And that is just one concentration with examples of Arts and Crafts and Bungalow styles throughout the city. It is really a nice architectural design that is very appealing. Not an impossible undertaking. I don't think I would bother to repost many.

If anyone wants to know why we recommend bringing new category ideas to the forums, they just need to read this thread! Count me in.

FIGURATIVE -- Any sculpture based on a figure -- human or animal -- that is NOT identifiable as a particular individual. Some of the examples given are at least partially abstract, which was actually the original intent of the category although it soon enlarged to include totally realistic sculptures. PHOTOS -- We shouldn't be upset if a waymark is declined because it doesn't meet the category requirements. My rule of thumb (I have a lot of thumbs) is to take more pictures than I think I'll need. It is like having a back up. I also usually post MORE than the minimum number of photos, especially in art categories. For a sculpture like this, for instance, I would submit two or three close-up photos from different angles and than one from a distance to give some perspective in its setting. I would also look for a signature, usually on the base, and take a close-up of it. EXCEPTIONS -- So, if an exception were made, would that mean that the category officers now have to accept ALL waymarks with only one photo? That attitude is one reason why reviewers seem strict about their requirements. It seems clear to me that an exception is just that -- an exception. It is NOT a global change in category requirements. It is an exception, NOT the setting of a precedent. Sometimes a waymark that should have been declined gets approved. Then people complain when their noncompliant waymark is declined because such-and-such a waymark was previously approved. As a reviewer, I try to maintain a balance between strictness and flexibility. Sometimes it seems that no matter which way I go, someone is going to be unhappy.

Dunkin Donuts was another unresponsive category. After waiting months, emailing the leader, all without response, I sent in an official request and was appointed leader. So, I immediately cleared the long queue (including two of my own, so don't be aghast) and updated the description, promoted some new people and opened it up for more to join. We'll work on clearing out the inactive officers and keep this category running. There is absolutely no reason why a category shouldn't have at least 3 ACTIVE officers who will share the reviewing tasks. If they are checking in even once a week, no waymark should wait beyond the 72-hour threshold, or at least not very often. My rule of thumb is that I wait at least a week before making inquiries, depending on the category. There are often reasons we have no knowledge of that can affect reviewing time. Hard to believe, but there really is more to life than Waymarking.