sernikk

Could someone help me out. Where can I fit Tram cars? The closest I can get is "Static Train Cars" or "Permanent Car Displays", but neither of those seems to fit trams exactly. Is this a category gap? Examples: 1) Serves currently as a tourist shop, but it is also a memorial that 100 years ago there were trams in this city (there is a plaque not far away) 2) Permanent display of a small, private collection of tram cars. Really cool by the way.

Some time passed, I've done some thinking, and I faced an issue. There are places, with permanent structures designed for some specific games like Table Tennis, see below. I Think there is no reason not to accept such places. Of course when there are multiple tables at the same location, one waymark should be added only. But what about tables designed to play chess which are next to it? These are tables with chessboards on them. It's also a game, chess is considered to be a sport, but should it be part of this category, what do you think? I personally wouldn't accept chess tables, as they are too common in some places - I mean like 5 or 6 in one location, practically never used to play chess, as this is a game mostly played inside (I think?). But I could say the same about table tennis. I don't really know what to think, so some feedback would be appreciated. Also, if anyone feels like adding something to the bigger post I made above (April 12), I'm all ears. Thanks

I feel that you are trying to argument something, which would deny the current state. I understand the easy association: multi-cache - > multiple stages - > can't have a checker (still could, but I understand some people may be confused), but we could easily do the same with mysteries. Mystery Caches have checkers - fact. There are no-stage, one-stage, multi-stage mysteries - fact. Other cache types don't have checkers - fact. There are no-stage, one-stage, multi-stage letterboxes - fact. Do you see what I mean? I don't think it makes much sense to find a logic in here. There is some reasoning for sure, which I don't know, and that is what I would love to hear from the HQ, or someone who has a different idea maybe? Edit: I don't understand, I just checked and they don't? Am I not seeing something?

Exactly. As said, if the checker would be available, nobody forces the owner to use it. A bad multi can be bad with or without the checker, the checker may help. Exactly like with a Mystery Cache which is done in-field (yeah, they are a thing too!). Overall we have 3 other cache types that may require a checker: Multi-Cache, Wherigo, Letterbox. Let's say the first two are not a big deal. Wherigo is giving you the final zone (sometimes not the coordinates, but ok), and nobody wants a checker in a multi-cache (that is your wish ). But what about letterboxes? In the beginning they were supposed to involve a small riddle, lead you a path or something like this, but let's be honest times have changed. I see now multiple letterboxes which are done exactly like a Mystery Cache, but there can't be a HQ checker. But why really? Because I see here the exact same case as with Mystery Caches.

Just saying, but my android app (GCDroid) supports the HQ checker. I guess on iOS Cachly is also making that move, or have already made. I wouldn't relate to the official app as the HQ itself says that there are features not available in their app, but available in Cachly for example (reactions to logs as an example). Of course you are right - we all can use 3rd party checkers, but the point of the in-built checker is: 100% availability, without having to depend on other sources, easy access, and of course the confirmation of the coordinates being in the system. Yeah I see your point Haven't actually thought about those, as in my area these multi-caches are pretty rare. More often it is an offset multi, with a virtual stage at the beginning. But as said by mustakorppi - there are already mystery caches with multiple physical stages. Nobody says that there needs to be a checker on those, but it is an option. But even without the possibility to check each stage, this would still be a good thing overall. Just to have it as an option. Because an additional option is always welcome, in the opposite to lack of some functionality. I think with time we will get the HQ checker in other geocaching apps too, not only the ones that I mentioned, and it would be very, very handy to have the checker in other cache types!

Of course I'm talking about the final checker - the same as it is right now in Mystery Caches. Letterbox caches are pretty often the same as a Mystery and they have no checker, because... I don't know why? Confirming final coordinates which are in the system is very important the moment you try to hide something in a high dense area. It would just be useful to "be sure" - sometimes even a small difference is changing everything. The exact same work as with Mystery Caches I suppose?

Hello, I just want to ask a question regarding the in-built solution checker. Are there any plans of letting people add these checker to other cache types than "Mysteries"? If yes, why it hasn't been done yet? If not, then what is the reasoning behind that decision? Thank you

Brzmi jak niewyczyszczone filtry wyszukiwania. No ale tak jak kolega wyżej wspomniał, za mało szczegółów. Czy dotyczy to 'Search Map', czy 'Browse Map' może również być istotne.

Are there any plans on implementing a list of own logs which were upvoted? I'm not talking about notifications like on the forums here, but maybe a list of logs which received votes. Without this I don't even know if someone liked my log or even read it.

In case of websites in 2021, "old is always better"

I found this white-screen bugs on at least 3 different pages: Unpublished caches, hide a new cache, map, lists. Half of the service is unavailable.

same here, on every browser

Try to relog inside the app

5 Smileys are not a big problem, they are just stats. The real problem is not to have a possibility of reporting any issue with an Adventure Lab. Sometimes the questions are out of date because the site has changed and you have no way to let the owner know.

I think you could say the same about Basketball Courts (or public playgrounds - they are everywhere!), and they do have their own category - only for them. I would even say that places to play basketball are more common in some regions. I don't know how it looks in your area, but in mine I can count one nearest football field (not a professional one) and at least two for basketball. It all depends. Surely there are some small football fields in many areas, but they are not a sure thing - especially if we count only public, standalone places, free for all. One thing I forgot to mention in regards to your question. This category would not be interested in running tracks as there are no points to count. Shortly said: you can't play "running".

To nie są geocoiny! To są PWG - WoodCoiny. To co widzisz na PWG to nie kod trackowalny, a kod GC skrzynki. PWG to fanty i nie nalezy ich zabierać, jeśli nie ma się nic w zamian. Najlepiej wymieniać je uczciwie 1:1 za jakieś własne posiadane.

Thanks Keith for the last post mentioning some of the issues. I needed some time to list everything what is in my mind: pros, cons, issues, so I was writing things up. These forum always kept unfinished replies in form of a draft, and now for me it didn't and thoughts I collected here got lost. I don't blame the website, It's on me. I will try to recreate what I have written before. I see the category as a chance to list various places for sports which are: - not very-well known, unique, local (examples listed above as: teqball, fodbold-golf and more..) - don't have their own category yet. I agree that we should focus only on places that are outdoors. It's easier to waymark them. These places should also be accessible for everyone who wants to use them. So no need to exclude Professional Sport Venues, as these are not something this category would be looking for. The proposal of "for it to be a sport, 'points' must be earned, scores kept" is something I agree with. But also many games (which are not exactly sports) could and should fit easily here, like cornhole mentioned above (there is a separate thing about it being permanent, I will get to that later). So overall this would create something like Outdoor Sports and Games? Of course no redundancy allowed, so everything which has its own category should go there (e.g. Lawn Bowling). One place/field/court/playground = one waymark. So if it happens to be a multi-functional facility for more than one sport, this should be listed as one. Fitting some sports in this category would create differences in approach, e.g. handball and volleyball courts could be listed here, but basketball has its own category - Outdoor Basketball Courts. This is something not really problematic (only aesthetic), but it can be in some cases: So here we can see two basketball courts which are part of a bigger field which can be multi-functional. How should we list such places? This can be clearly added to the mentioned basketball category, but I guess also to the Tennis Facilities (the blue field in the middle)? So we already have two different categories for this place, but it should also be possible to add it as a handball court (or soccer, as such places are often used for both). I would really love to hear someone who has an idea how to approach this. I think we should add such play fields only focusing on sports which can fit into this category only. Others could be listed in the description but the requirement is to have at least one sport which doesn't fit into any other category. When there is more than one such sports, just do a 2 in 1 waymark. The waymarked place had to be permanent. There needs to be either a sign showing the purpouse of this place or a recognizable element(s) of the game which can be played there. I think that is clear it has to be like this. Every game in a non-permanent form, unfolded on the site and taken away by the players should not be considered. So cornhole would be fine, but only when there is already a permanent platform at the site. More about redundancy. Keith brought up the Accessible-Designed Recreational Locations. This category is to list recreational places designed for disabled people. Honestly I don't see the problem here, but maybe I'm looking wrong at it. Let's take something that may interfere. If we have as an example a Wheelchair basketball court, then it can be added there, but it would also fit into our Outdoor Sports category Outdoor Basketball Courts. It is still sports, but nicely it is also designed for disabled people. We could just forbid cross-Waymarking, but I think sometimes it would be really hard to determine who is right and where it fits more. I also believe such cases would be rare. Since 2009 there are 211 waymarks in ADRL and by looking at them I see that the most would not even fit into our sports category. Other categories. I think we can create a list of not allowed sports and games, as there is already a place for them in Waymarking. I've seen such lists in some categories that already exist and I don't think it's too hard to create such. I went through the categories and listed them below. Excluded outdoor sports and games: Baseball -> Amateur Baseball Fields Basketball -> Outdoor Basketball Courts Golf, including: Disc Golf -> Disc Golf Courses Mini Golf -> Miniature Golf Regular Golf -> Public and Private Golf Courses Hockey -> Inline Hockey Rinks Laser Tag Facilities -> Laser Tag Facilities I've realized that this is indoor. Lawn Bowling -> Lawn Bowling Shooting Ranges -> Shooting Ranges Tennis -> Tennis Facilities I think that is everything? Correct me if I'm wrong. Not so much I guess. We can always add "that any other sports that can be listed in other category should not be listed here", but that is kind of obvious. All these are my thoughts, so it would be nice to hear comments, especially from more experienced waymarkers. But for me it seems like a possible category to do Ernest

Uwierz, że te ~15000km, które zrobił ten przedmiot podróżny, nie robi aż takiego wrażenia. Kiedyś miałem okazję natknąć się na taki co okrążył ziemię ze 3 razy, a z pewnością są i takie co mają jeszcze większy przebieg

Zadałeś bardzo dużo pytań, postaram się odpowiedzieć na przynajmniej część z nich. Przedmioty podróżne maja specjalne kody, które umożliwiają logowanie, że się: widziało je, zabrało je ze sobą, zostawiło. Chcąc zalogować TB - Travel Bug (np. takie znalezione w skrzynce), należy to zrobić za pomocą aplikacji oficjalnej, partnerskiej lub tutaj: https://www.geocaching.com/track/ wpisując znaleziony kod. Zaznacza się wtedy co sięzrobiło z tym TB - w większości chyba używa się funkcji "discover", czyli że widziało się TB w skrzynce. Nadać numeru samodzielnie nie można. Jedyna opcja to kupić takowy u dystrybutorów (partnerów) współpracujących z Geocaching. Przykładowe TB możesz zobaczyć m.in. na stronie wspomnianego przez Ciebie sklepu. Nie jest to ogółem złe, ale z zamysłu TB podróżują tak po prostu i nie traktuje się ich jak fantów, wyjątkiem są np. TB Hotele, gdzie autor prosi by w skrzynce zawsze jakiś podróżnik był. Jeśli widzisz, że dany przedmot chce dotrzeć np. do Austrii i mozesz mu w tym pomóc, to go zabierz - jego autor z pewnością się ucieszy Tak. W zasadzie wszystko bazuje na dokładności poszukiwaczy. Niektórzy logują skąd zabrali i odłożyli, a niektórzy oznaczają każdą skrzynkę, którą razem z trackablem odwiedzili. Najgorzej jak ktoś nie zaloguje wcale, albo zabierze dla siebie, no ale to jest ryzyko podobne jak z zakładaniem skrzynek. Wiele osób, w tym ja, ma swoje personalne przedmioty podróżne, które podróżują z nimi, bądź są "niezabieralne" np. koszulka, pieczątka, czy naklejka na szybę z kodem. Trudno byłoby zorganizować serię TB i myślę, że nie wzbudziłaby ona dużego zainteresowania. Sam mam jednego TB, który od chyba roku utknął gdzieś w Hiszpanii u jakiejś geocacherki i tak sobie czekam na jakiś znak życia Każdy przedmiot TB można podejrzeć pod kątem tego jaką trasę przebył - w logach i na minimapie. Poniżej przykład jak to wygląda: Nic nie stoi na przeszkodzie by kupić najtańszy możliwy kod i spróbować go po prostu wykorzystać w dowolny, wybrany przez siebie sposób. Osobiście robiłem tak z kodami ze sklepu z PWG WoodCoins. W międzyczasie kiedy pisałem ten post, dwóch recenzentów dorzuciło od siebie artykuł i nagranie. Myślę, że w tej całości znajdziesz odpowiedzi na swoje pytania Pozdrawiam, Ernest

I've never had problems with the Message Center until today. Blank screen.

+ Squash (click) + Teqball - which by accident comes out to be a sport of inspiration for this category And I don't think these would fit into tennis - it would probably depend what the officer likes or not and nobody wants that to be the case. Either Tennis Facilities should fit every tennis-be-like sports (which is currently not the case), or only basic tennis and let Multifarious category take care of the rest. I like the 1st option, but that's me. I would propose, that this category should focus on not so popular sports, to give them as examples, but allowing any other sport which doesn't fit anywhere else. I recognize Soccer or Volleyball as popular sports, but given that there is no category for them yet, then they are not so popular here - in the Waymarking community. Or they would have been? And one more thing - are we focusing on outdoor activities only or on indoor too? So Soccer fields would be OK, but any indoor halls for futsal (click) would be not? Anyway, as I already said, I like the whole idea

Such a challenge is against guidelines and won't be published

I think I got a new one: Lack of response for reported bugs

Thanks for your comment on that. I understand your reasoning and my was the same. No other category, similar, then why not? I can also see the point of the other officer, but this should result in creating a new category like proposed. A mix of various not covered activites or some smaller categories fitting exact sports. I think Waymarking should cover most, when not all, activities, exactly as it is done in other themed categories - there always is a "multifarious", where you can put your place, when all other seems not right. As said I'm happy that some steps were made and I'm ready to help or wait for the result

Sounds great