Jump to content

vulture1957

Members
  • Posts

    916
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by vulture1957

  1. 7 minutes ago, T0SHEA said:

    I did notice it was burnt around the edges. (since you mentioned it) 

     

     

    Pizza PieJPG.JPG

    I'm OK with the shrimp, but broccoli does not go on pizza. Steamed with cheddar sauce as a  side dish, but not ON the pizza.

  2. I don't know that Ive ever seen a Tim Hortons. Do all of them look similar? If they got the building outside done, maybe the signs up, everyone could see that it's a Tim Hortons (or will be as soon as it's finished).

     

  3. 10 minutes ago, FamilieFrohne said:

    Observation made by me for the user dvddragon: He stated "Skåne" as his home and you found a town of that name in Sweden in the region "Värmland", but most of his waymarks done are in the swedish REGION "Skåne". So the city of Helsingborg or Malmö would fit better.

    ok, I'll change that

  4. 39 minutes ago, ScroogieII said:

     

    Anyhow, a question: - would it be good form to Waymark a place that doesn't yet exist?

    Just wondering...

    Keith

    I'd waymark the sign as it is now, and post another picture after it is finished, like the Grand Opening, with all the streamers and flags and such.

  5. 1 hour ago, ScroogieII said:

     

    BUT, as time passes, people will tend to move about, thereby somewhat muddying the waters, even yours. I see at least one (lemme go back and peek at the map one more time)... ... yes, just one, is now about 200 km. off. Not your fault, just that, as I said, people do move around. No, I'm not going to help you out and expose the inexactitude. After all, you, yourself, profess to have plenty of time to track it down. NB - the km. should be a BIG hint. :)

     

    As I said, this is a map of where I think people are, either from their profile (if they say where they are from) or from the waymarks they make. It's just to give me a hint of where currently active waymarkers might be located, so that I can see if they would be in the flight path of the ISS for a possible sighting.

    Now, if I contact them and they say "No, we are now at XXXX" I'll change it. Or, if as FamilieFrohme has done, someone contacts me with their correct city, I'll update. Otherwise, it is my "best guess".There are a few waymarkers that I have no idea where they might be -- FamilieFrohme was one, WalksFarTX is another.

  6. 48 minutes ago, r.e.s.t.seekers said:

    I am here to learn what to do with a Waymark that is outdated.  This sounds like the same topic.  I posted a Waymark for a visitor center and now that visitor center has moved.  What should be done with the Waymark?  (WM145EP) 

     

    Update the Waymark with new coordinates and photo and website?

    Put  "REMOVED" somewhere in the Waymark (where?) as suggested above?   And post a new Waymark for the new location?

    We've seen a few other Waymarks in town for which the business is gone, but haven't noticed that they were updated. 

     

    We tried to go to the (old) visitor center today and didn't know it had closed until we got home and I asked google when the open hours were. 

    I feel sad that my Waymark is now not helpful. 

     

    I have a waymark just like that -- a city/town hall (Waymark Code: WMJK5P). About a year after I made the waymark, they bought a new building and moved. I changed the original waymark  to read that it has been updated and moved; and marked it [-Legacy-], then posted the new location as a new waymark. This leaves the history of the town, that the town hall had been at a different location.

     

    The other option, just as good, is to just change the long description to tell about the old location, then put the info about the new location.  Both options are good, just your preference.

  7. well, it's showing up correctly now. I had been jumping back and forth between cities, I guess I confused the computer. Logged out of everything and started again. Seems to be OK.

     

    Thanks Max and 99 for checking

  8. I am trying to set up an ISS Sighting for July 21, 22:29:32 75°, traveling NW to SE over OKC.

     

    When I put in Denver CO for some other waymarkers and have Heavens Above show visible only passes, it doesn't show the pass. But, if I change it to ALL PASSES, it shows the pass at 21:27:44  72°.

     

    Similar problem over Twin Falls, ID, 21:25:41  53°.

     

    The ground tracks show the passes as visible. Do I have something set incorrectly, or am I reading this wrong? Can someone else check these passes out and see if they are OK for a sighting for me, please.

     

    I always use HA set as visible only, but if this is a bug I will start checking all passes and make sure I don't miss any.

  9. 3 hours ago, julie609 said:

    I’m new to Waymarking but have been geocaching for years. I noticed that my stats aren’t accurate. I logged 25 Waymarks yesterday and 2 today. I checked my daily grid and it shows zero for today and only 11 of 25 for yesterday. J checked my logs. They’re definitely there as visited. Am I doing something wrong? Also I checked last night and it said I have 71 visits (88 unique) What does that mean?

    the 88 number (now 90) is the number of visits in the system. Six in NJ Hist Markers, 6 in Signs of History, 4 in Abstract Sculptures, 3 each in This Old Church, Car Part Sculptures and Dated Buildings.Cornerstones, 2 each in 14 categories and 1 each in another 37 categories. Add all that up and it is 90. 

    I've tried to get the 71 visits, and can't figure out what that means. And no telling why it takes time for visits to show up. Wait until you start posting - that takes from minutes to months!

     

    Lee in El Reno, OK

  10. OK, I admit it. I have too much time on my hands.

     

    I was, once again, trying to find some ISS Sighting virgins to try to get to play. I got tired of going back and forth, looking up where folks waymark at (guessing that would be where they live). So, I went in and marked where folks had already posted a ISS Sighting, and then went to my old Forums postings welcoming new waymarkers. I looked up the new waymarkers and put a dot on my guess at their location. Wow, I can see where a whole bunch of us are at.

     

    Map web address - https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?hl=en&mid=1R87HD0kXnED21L9pMNr1STXBVaxGSDiU&ll=35.19677836257868%2C-74.57435702868577&z=3

     

    I don't want to hear about invading someone's privacy. I got this off Waymarking.com. These people posted the info, I am taking it that they WANT it to be seen.

    • Upvote 2
  11. I just deleted a visit to one of my waymarks. I could immediately tell that the uploaded picture was just a screen capture and zoom of my own photo. And, this is the only visit to ANY waymark in Oklahoma from a person from Arizona.I find it hard to believe they came from AZ to OK and only went to the corner of Phillips and 66 for a waymark visit.

     

    (Notice, I am playing nice. No names involved.)

  12. 1 hour ago, SearchN said:

    As far as having to go completely across that's one I haven't even thought of since I really haven't seen any examples of what that might be or what purpose it would serve to only hang over one side of a road and not the other. Do you have examples of such a structure? If I understand your question correctly. The closest I can think of is the pier discussed below but why it would only go as far as one side of the road I don't know. Possible though. Another would be sign structures or traffic sensors, cameras of some sort which wouldn't go into the category.

    I was thinking about some of the restaurants on the Gulf coast. The restaurant is on stilts over the water, but the entrance door and front of the building is on the beach

  13. 12 minutes ago, SearchN said:

    I haven't even gotten into rules and regulations as to what types of structures are even allowed to be built over the interstate or other public systems here in the states nowadays. As with the McDonald's, could other structures like that be built today or was it more or less grandfathered in if the regulations had change? If anymore could or couldn't be built really isn't a concern though, it still exists in any case.

    there was a news article just in the past couple of weeks in Oklahoma City. They are planning a similar Wendy's over I-35 in Moore, OK, just south of OKC. One of us here in the OKC area will get that one quickly, if the category passes.

     

    Another question -- does it have to go completely across the road, trail, whatever? Or just be on one side and go over? Would buildings on boardwalks be OK (as they could be considered on a bridge/pier, and the bridge/pier would not be OK)?

  14. 13 minutes ago, SearchN said:

    So I hope this cleared a few things up, confused you more or brought up some new ideas or questions. Just throwing this out, if you were to include the following.

    Why would you exclude over a railway? Case in point the snow sheds. If they could be viewed from a safe location on public property could they be included as well? Surprisingly nothing has even been mentioned about what type of thoroughfare's these structures crossover should or shouldn't be included. Please be nice in reply and lets have this conversation too. Is it to much to add to the list? Personally I like a varied category. The only real thing I dislike is having to wade through the mundane to find the one gem of a waymark. That's only what I consider mundane though, maybe not to another, but high tension power lines would flood the category, not that I don't think they are interesting in their own right just to common everywhere to most with the possible exception of those who live on small islands or beyond the furthest reaches of civilization. There can be harmony even in what appears at first to be pure chaos. Thanks, David

    One problem here ... roads - OK. Rail - OK. Hiking path - OK.

    Then we have ----- waterways. That will have bridges, oil derricks, utility easements (electric, natural gas, water), and just about anything else! It either goes over or under! That'll be a bear to write in the description.

×
×
  • Create New...