JimmyEv

Interesting concept. Wish I would've read about it a month ago. A #2007 night cache at midnight would be cool. But, of course, if I planned it that way it'd be a DNF.

That is what we do now. Virtual locations are incorporated into puzzles and multis. Waymarking can cause us serious problems in SC. Please check out my previous post. I see your previous post. I don't understand (I've been trying to figure it out). Waymarking isn't Geocaching.

Why is there a need to bring pure virtuals back when you can always do a multi-cache (offset) with virtual legs? Even in urban areas, there's got to be at least one big park in the city, or at least on the outskirts, where the final cache can be hidden. I like Waymarking -- it's gotten a lot easier to use -- but I still don't know quite what to make of it. Seems to me, at this stage, to be more of a tool than a game or hobby (except for creating waymarks -- that's very hobby-ish).

Did you set the photo as the default image? I noticed that if I only submit one photo, and don't set it as the default, then it isn't displayed -- the thumbnail says 'there are no images for this waymark yet.' But once I set it as the default image, it appears as the thumbnail.

I think that my category is ready for an officer vote. BUT --- none of the officers (nor me) can see the category description. We're still taken to the home page.

I agree the logging requirements for a 'visit' ought to be standard and simple. I've run into others' waymarks while making my own but had to log notes instead of visits because I didn't take a 'self-potrait' and I just think gps pictures are kind of silly and don't add anything to the waymark.

At first I didn't like this redundancy because it's redundant. But now I'm seeing that having overlapping categories allows different people an opportunity to write about the same waymark and put their own spin on it. And it allows people interested in specific things to find them easier (say an art museum's sculpture garden when all you're interested in is sculpture). Overlap is good. You could relate waymarks to one another on a bookmark list. If we had bookmarks.

Ok, I believe this issue is now corrected. Thanks for your help! Ok, now I can create a category, and it's saved, but I'm having a lot of trouble getting back to it to see what the page looks like. Almost everything I click on just takes me back to the homepage. On the Groups Details Page, if I click on 'Skyscrapers', it takes me to the home page instead of the category. On the edit page, if I click on the 'View Skyscrapers Details' it takes me to the home page.

This just happened to me. I filled out everything for the category, clicked the add button, and got sent to the homepage. I go back, and the category isn't there. So I did it all again with the same result -- no category.

This is annoying. I thought there'd be a category for skyscrapers, but couldn't find any groups or a category. So I searched the forums and dug up this thread. And there was one all along. I haven't been doing this very long. Is there a way to make sure you're not creating a category/group that's already been created?

I created a group for skyscrapers. Anyone that wants to join can click here: http://www.Waymarking.com/groups/details.a...=Rinaghiu" This is what I've got so far. Any suggestions are welcome. Skyscrapers: Any building over 500 feet or 150 meters tall. Skyscrapers define the modern city. Most cities can be recognized from the skyscrapers in their skyline. When you see the Sears Tower, you immediately think of Chicago; the Empire State Building represents New York City; the Prudential Building is most definately San Francisco. Almost every major city has its unique collection of skyscrapers. Early skyscrapers were built with a base, shaft and crown with Beaux Arts or Classical Revival details. This morphed into Art Deco skyscrapers, which emphasized their verticality and usually had stepped set-backs. After World War II the International Style, basically glass or concrete boxes with little detail, became popular. As a reaction to the utilitarianism of the International Style, extravagant Post-Modern buildings became the latest trend in designing skyscrapers. To list your skyscraper, make sure it’s listed at http://www.emporis.com/en/ . The height of the building at Emporis will be used to determine the structure’s height. In the long description, include any interesting details about the building. Two photographs are required: One showing the skyscraper’s position in the city’s skyline, a second showing the skyscraper itself. To visit this waymark, you must provide a description of your experience and add one photograph (taken by you) of any part of the skyscraper to the gallery. This photograph doesn’t have to have either you or your gps in it. Variables included will be: Building Name Structure Height (from Emporis) Floors Year Built Style (Beaux Arts, Classical Revival, Art Deco, International Style, Post-Modern) Architect/Design Firm Use (residential, office) Publicly accessible areas Hours Cost

After re-submitting a waymark, I click on the 'View Waymark' link at the top of the page. It takes me to the Waymark Directory instead of the waymark.

I don't see geocaching going any more 'mainstream' than any other outdoor hobby, like hiking, biking, kayaking or mountain climbing. I know very few people that do those things, and yet they're considered to be mainstream. So I don't see any effect. It'll still be a small niche market.

I can't see the category, but from what I remember the requirement was something like the site has to be listed on the location's official tourism site. A lot of those sites (such as chambers of commerce and convention and visitors bureaus) just list advertisers. Maybe the waymark should be listed in, and referenced, to a guide book. Like AAA, Mobil, Michelin, Fodor's, Frommers, Lonley Planet, Time Out, Let's Go, Rough Guide, Moon Handbooks or a plethora of others (i.e. 'This place was mentioned in:__________'). I don't know if that will help you get what you're after or not. Too bad we don't have bookmark lists (yet).

I like this idea. But it makes me wonder -- in a drop down variable menu, is it possible to choose more than one variable? Like if a stadium was used for both Football and Baseball, could you select both from the drop down? Just curious.

When visiting a new city or town, sometimes you don't know where all the neat shops and restaurants are. I've visited New Orleans a few times, but thought that the only place to hang out was the French Quarter. Then, when I had to work there for a few weeks, I stumbled upon Magazine Street and the Garden District, as well as other cool neighborhoods that were mostly 'local.' This category would be for places like that. For listing, the district would have to be walkable, a pleasant place to stroll. The district would also have to meet two of the following characteristics: 1. The majority of the district is outside. 2. The district is targeted to tourists and/or conventioneers (evidenced by a concentration of hotels). 3. The district has architectural and/or historical significance. 4. The majority of stores and restaurants in the district are unique, i.e. not found elsewhere. With these characteristics, the catgory should include touristy areas (San Antonio's Riverwalk; Dallas's West End), local areas (Dallas's Deep Ellum; Pittsburgh's South Side and Shadyside; Houston's Rice Village), small towns with lots of shops and restaurants (Jefferson, TX; Kemah, TX) and downtowns. It should exclude most garden-variety malls and strip centers. Is this workable?

Wouldn't this fall under the Art Museum category? Maybe a category for formal gardens, to include sculpture gardens, would be better. Most formal gardens contain sculpture.

I don't understand the photo requirements of gpsr's for most of waymarks. You should be able to demonstrate that you visited a site within your log. I've been reading through and seen a lot of logs that just say 'visited.' Surely you can add something to the waymark. Was it enjoyable? Have conditions changed? Is it worth visiting? Why? Not only does this add to the information, it should also be a good indicator that it's not an armchair log.

I double posted somehow. Anyways, I'd be interested.

I don't think this would be a 'fun' category. But I do think it'd be a useful category.

That's what I'm doing. But that's prone to mistakes (i.e. forgetting to correct the fields).

When entering waymarks, I have to retrieve information from about four different programs. It's a lot easier to enter a handful of waymarks at a time, by opening the mapping program, filling in all of the co-ordinate parameters, then saving as draft (Save without submitting), then repeating the process with the photo program, then the word processor, then the web browser. The problem that I'm having is that when you press 'save without submitting' it won't let you save unless all the required variables are filled out. The waymark isn't final, it's not ready for approval yet, so why can't you 'save without submitting' without filling out all the required variables? If you could, that would streamline entry somewhat.

Architect or design firm might make a good variable. Historic skyscrapers like the ones in Chicago are usually on the NRHP.

There's two skyscrapers in Houston with Sky Lobbies open to the public. Both give really good views of different parts of downtown. I thought they might fit into the 'Cityscapes' but, since both are banks, cameras aren't allowed inside. And they're only 1100 feet apart. So maybe there should be a catefory for skyscrapers.

But then it might be covered by snow. Or you might be able to follow someone else's tracks right to it.