The Day Has Arrived At Last - Sort Of!

1.7k · August 16, 2005

Yesterday night Jeremy "switched on" the new site where Virtuals, Locationless and other assorted forms of hunting with a GPS will live. This is what has been so eagerly anticipated (by some!). At present it is only available to Premium members but the intention is that anyone and everyone will be able to use it in a few weeks.

I urge you to read all the FAQ's before diving in with your new Waymarking categories. As part of the Beta testing I have "claimed" my 5 categories which although applicable worldwide I felt would be of particular interest to UK cachers.

They are :

Antiquities (e.g. Iron age forts, megaliths etc.)

Castles

Military Installations

Pubs & Inns

UK Trigpoints

At present these are in a very incomplete form but I hope to work them up into something useful over the coming days.

There is a forum devoted to Waymarking as it is called here. The main website is called www.Waymarking.com

HOWEVER - I have just tried to login and I got a nasty error message. I have reported this to TPTB so I expect it only to be a temporary glitch. You might have more success than me.

As a consequence of this new website going live, no more virtual caches will be listed on Geocaching.com. This is no big deal as it's been virtually(!) impossible for some time.

Enjoy. :rolleyes:

August 16, 2005

will existing virtuals be transferred? or stay as is?

August 16, 2005

Just a daft question.... why could this not be incorporated into the main geocaching site ?

It just seems to me, that I have now two sites to keep an eye on, so spending twice as long on "admin" while all I want to to is get out and geocache ?

1.8k · August 16, 2005

I have read the FAQs but confess I am confused about what the site is for and what the beta limitations are. The FAQs apear to be about doing things that are currently impossible.

1.7k · August 16, 2005

will existing virtuals be transferred? or stay as is?

From the "Read Me First" post pinned to the top of the Waymarking Forum:

Not many virtual caches are being approved. What are you planning to do with virtual caches?

Early on we realized that virtual caches have their place as a way to introduce people to unique locations where a cache couldn't be placed. Since waymark categories are themes for what are essentially virtual caches, a waymark category will be the future location for virtual caches. As a result we will be removing the virtual cache listing from geocaching.com in favor of new waymark categories for these listings. You'll see that by adding virtuals to themes make them easier to seek out and enjoy.

Existing maintained virtuals on geocaching.com will be grandfathered on the web site.

1.4k · August 16, 2005

will existing virtuals be transferred? or stay as is?

[quote

Existing maintained virtuals on geocaching.com will be grandfathered on the web site.

What does "grandfathered" mean? Are they stayting on the site or going?

1.5k · August 16, 2005

I think it means the same as archived. They will remain so that your stats and logs remain but will no longer be loggable (second new word for today :rolleyes: )

2k · August 16, 2005

Looks quite interesting

Having a quick look at the categories I can already spot a few Waymarks that I could create (read: PUBS <_< :rolleyes: :huh: ), although "Insect Sculptures" might be a little hard to find

The website should also open up even more new and interesting locations that we couldn't really use before.

It is a pity that Waymarks couldn't be incorporated into Geocaching.com as a new type of cache , but as stated in the FAQ's, Geocaching.com wasn't designed to cope with the huge amount of virtuals and locationless etc. (and looking at how many categories are already available, I can see why )

I do hope though, that the new site doesn't split the "community" and that people use both sites to get the best of both worlds

My home town has just opened a new Heritage Trail with loads of blue plaques everywhere, so I'm guessing I could use some of these ?

1.4k · August 16, 2005

Dictionary.com defines it as:

To exempt (one involved in an activity or business) from new regulations.

So I am really none the wiser....

August 16, 2005

It means they will sit on a rocking chair with a bag of werthers originals close to hand, Smoking a pipe and musing over times gone past

1.4k · August 16, 2005

No new virtual geocaches will be listed on Geocaching.com

A sad day indeed - I can understand locationless in a seperate space but not virts :rolleyes:

I recon Webcam caches will be next...

Chris

August 16, 2005

Is this the reason I can't log on to geocaching.com this morning?

BTW - I think it means the virtuals will still be there and looked after in thier old age but no new ones will be created.

Lisa

August 16, 2005

I can understand locationless going across but not virtuals. Some virtuals are a lot more than just a waymark. I have enjoyed some great virtual caches, ok some could be forced to have a micro at the location but not all. A sad day for geocaching.

Onus on owner to allow locationless to go across, the read me implies that the locationless can stay on geocaching but doesn't say whether it can still be logged. If it can, then how many locationless owners will transfer?

Also earthcaches to go to Waymarking eventually, we've only just seen them arrive!

1.5k · August 16, 2005

Hmmm. There still seem to be a few problems on the website. When you click on the link to find an interesting category a pop-up appears, but it is impossible to enter any data in the search panel. I have tried in IE and Firefox. Anyone else had any success?

3.7k · August 16, 2005

Looks great to me - I added my first waymark earlier today. More to follow!

HH

August 16, 2005

The problem is that there is not much data on there.

Try searching under postcode 43017 and you will find (the first) entry for bloggers for me.

I think that later on the problem is going to be too much junk being returned by location - just think how many waymarks could be serviced by a location.....

red painted doors, green painted doors, mcdonalds, burger king, wendys, fire hydrants, ponds, churches, pubs, libraries, cemetaries.......

edit: Actually the search engine box is just a graphic at the moment.

Edited August 16, 2005 by DomHeknows

1.5k · August 16, 2005

Oops! What I clicked was a sort of help function not the actual search facility! :rolleyes:

1.5k · August 16, 2005

The problem is that there is not much data on there.
Try searching under postcode 43017 and you will find (the first) entry for bloggers for me.

I think that later on the problem is going to be too much junk being returned by location - just think how many waymarks could be serviced by a location.....

red painted doors, green painted doors, mcdonalds, burger king, wendys, fire hydrants, ponds, churches, pubs, libraries, cemetaries.......

Sad to say, there already is a McDonalds category.

August 16, 2005

Sad to say, there already is a McDonalds category.

Of course there is...

... and people still wonder why these need to be moved off the "proper" geocaching listing site. :rolleyes:

-Wlw.

3.7k · August 16, 2005

later on the problem is going to be too much junk being returned by location

I think that this has been addressed by not allowing a search until you've selected a category.

HH

3.8k · August 16, 2005

Sad to say, there already is a McDonalds category.

Of course there is...

... and people still wonder why these need to be moved off the "proper" geocaching listing site.

-Wlw.

Oh fantastic :huh: I better get out and bag the 6 in Stoke, before somebody beats me to it :rolleyes:

3.8k · August 16, 2005

Don't think I'll bother, thanks very much <_<

Now... if we could convince TPTB to shift all web cam caches, earth caches and micro caches as well as virtuals and locationless caches over to the other place... That would be nice, wouldn't it? It would leave the g.com site clear for all the proper caches... you remember surely.... the ones in plastic boxes and ammo cans :huh: :rolleyes:

August 16, 2005

The problem is that there is not much data on there.
Try searching under postcode 43017 and you will find (the first) entry for bloggers for me.

I think that later on the problem is going to be too much junk being returned by location - just think how many waymarks could be serviced by a location.....

red painted doors, green painted doors, mcdonalds, burger king, wendys, fire hydrants, ponds, churches, pubs, libraries, cemetaries.......

Sad to say, there already is a McDonalds category.

Great! And all those great virtuals will be associated with this site :rolleyes:

Time to convert all good virtuals to magnetic micros then <_<

August 16, 2005

Don't think I'll bother, thanks very much

I'm with John on this one! Will our renewal subscriptions be half price for those that don't want to use the new site?

Charles

August 16, 2005

>> Oh fantastic rolleyes.gif I better get out and bag the 6 in Stoke, before somebody beats me to it blink.gif unsure.gif

yeh! Supersize me! :rolleyes:

(yes, I messed this reply right up; Will get the hang of these forums soon don't worry <_< )

Edited August 16, 2005 by The Knights who say Ni

August 16, 2005

The whole sorry effort reminds us of..... "Why use two words when six-hundred and seventy-five thousand will do"!!!

Why it could not all have been incorporated into GC.COM we simply cannot understand. The work involved in all the re-organisation must have been horrendous and totally and absolutely unnecessary.

Oh well..... back to the ammo boxes.

3.3k · August 16, 2005

I can't quite see the point at the moment.... there are still too many caches left to find in the County/Country/World.

However, if there were no caches left or if they were banned by the government (no chance!), then this would be something else to waste my time over should I decide to.

Good luck to anyone who wants to take part in this new obsession, but I really can't be bothered

1.8k · August 16, 2005

I have floated a category as it is one that has interested me for a while, and neglected. Some of the categories being proposed look so amazingly genral to be completly pointless. I do fear that unless well controled, things will be worse than when virtuals were easier to get. I confess little attraction for locationless caches, but I have enjoyed some excellent virtuals and this new system worries me as encouraging the worst of both worlds. I guess we have to wait and see how things turn out.

3.8k · August 16, 2005

One question that I can't find the answer to in the FAQs:

Will adding a log to any of the categories on the new site add to your tally of 'finds' on geocaching.com?

It's probably there, I guess I must have missed it. If it does, then a couple of hours spent walking around London is going to potentially give you hundreds of finds.

1.7k · August 16, 2005

One question that I can't find the answer to in the FAQs:

Will adding a log to any of the categories on the new site add to your tally of 'finds' on geocaching.com?

It's probably there, I guess I must have missed it. If it does, then a couple of hours spent walking around London is going to potentially give you hundreds of finds.

I just logged HH's Isle of Man trig point to see what happens. It looks like the stats are kept apart from each other. Which is nice.

-

2k · August 16, 2005

I think I can confirm what SlytherinAlex said. I've logged one of the Waymarks and my Geocaching.com profile remains unaltered

August 16, 2005

One question that I can't find the answer to in the FAQs:

Will adding a log to any of the categories on the new site add to your tally of 'finds' on geocaching.com?

It's probably there, I guess I must have missed it. If it does, then a couple of hours spent walking around London is going to potentially give you hundreds of finds.

I just logged HH's Isle of Man trig point to see what happens. It looks like the stats are kept apart from each other. Which is nice.

-

"All survey marks or objects used by the UK Ordnance Survey."

Blimey, that's a bit all encompassing. So let's see, we've got trigpoints, cut benchmarks, flush brackets, bolts, projecting brackets. That's a few tens of thousands for starters. And we can all create them and log them.

Try UK Levelling to get you started.

I'm really really struggling with this Waymarking idea.

How about a tree category (there's probably one already) there's half a dozen outside my office window. And then there's blades of grass, grains of sand.

:huh: :blink:

1.7k · August 16, 2005

Having a quick look at the categories I can already spot a few Waymarks that I could create (read: PUBS ),

Pubs? Did someone mention Pubs?

August 16, 2005

How long before it's open to non-premium members?

August 16, 2005

Don't think I'll bother, thanks very much

Now... if we could convince TPTB to shift all web cam caches, earth caches and micro caches as well as virtuals and locationless caches over to the other place... That would be nice, wouldn't it? It would leave the g.com site clear for all the proper caches... you remember surely.... the ones in plastic boxes and ammo cans

I must agree with you here. Possibly add Jeeps and Coins to the list as well

August 16, 2005

I've had some great fun tracking down locationless virtual caches - some of them you really have to work hard for to boot - often harder than just following a gps arrow for 500 yards down a footpath and raking around under some leaves..

Now don't get me wrong, I'm as serious a 'traditional' cacher as the next nutcase with a gps, and getting out in the wild hunting tupperware is great fun, so please don't jump on me for the previous paragraph!

The issue I have is that all the worthwhile virtuals (of which there are quite a few) are going to be lost within a steaming morass of utterly useless junk. McDonalds restaurants? I ask you..

Actually, I'm going to create a category for those 100 metre marker posts you see beside the motorway - then I'm going to log every single one I passed on my holiday last week - all the way down the M5 and back! That'll be about 2400 logs without any trouble at all.

This is going to get very silly very quickly, and frankly, I think it's a great pity.

Hampk

August 16, 2005

How long before it's open to non-premium members?

One month. (It says, here.)

-Wlw.

August 16, 2005

I've had some great fun tracking down locationless virtual caches - some of them you really have to work hard for to boot - often harder than just following a gps arrow for 500 yards down a footpath and raking around under some leaves..

Now don't get me wrong, I'm as serious a 'traditional' cacher as the next nutcase with a gps, and getting out in the wild hunting tupperware is great fun, so please don't jump on me for the previous paragraph!

The issue I have is that all the worthwhile virtuals (of which there are quite a few) are going to be lost within a steaming morass of utterly useless junk. McDonalds restaurants? I ask you..

Actually, I'm going to create a category for those 100 metre marker posts you see beside the motorway - then I'm going to log every single one I passed on my holiday last week - all the way down the M5 and back! That'll be about 2400 logs without any trouble at all.

This is going to get very silly very quickly, and frankly, I think it's a great pity.

Hampk

Presumably it will depend on how the categories are policed

If someone proposes a 'catseyes in the middle of the road' category, clearly that would be absurd

However, a category likely to have resonance worldwide or being fun - eg 'gate guardians' at airforce bases or certain placenames like those related to a certain book (I can see a Da Vinci Code series already.....), might be worthwhile

Presumably the managers will have to do some research to ensure that the waymarks are not duplicated somewhere else. eg rollercoasters probably have an enthusiasts' website somewhere

Wait and see I would say

I note trig points on the category list - isn't there already a website for those?

August 16, 2005

I've had some great fun tracking down locationless virtual caches - some of them you really have to work hard for to boot - often harder than just following a gps arrow for 500 yards down a footpath and raking around under some leaves..

Likewise .

Loads of research gone in finding some of them .

Added difficulty of only the F.T.F. can claim .

3.8k · August 16, 2005

How about a tree category (there's probably one already) there's half a dozen outside my office window. And then there's blades of grass, grains of sand.

The Forester has already asked for it :lol: :lol: :lol:

August 16, 2005

It seems to be the value in this Waymarking thing isn't in the "game" aspect, more the waypoint data itself. What would make it really worthwhile is if this data were available for re-use, but I guess that's unlikely to happen.

If I had more time I'd have set up "open Waymarking" project already

August 16, 2005

Purpose seems to be beating me at the moment - prepared to wait and see how it turns out. Not sure what is so special about some of them. Although may solve the problem of the # of PQs needed to cover the UK if the virtuals move over, then the earth caches (seem like posh virtuals to me) ..... , and we may finaly get a virtual approved (not getting at you it's in the US :-) )

Sue

August 16, 2005

Wow are we dissapointed at this, the controls on category seem just a bit loose. But then they have to be created by the "we're not going to be waymark police". The topics listed so far seem ok, though not quite sure how you get a blogger, surely their coords move when they go to get supersized at a McD they are Waymarking so they are not a fixed point

some topics might be good (the type of thing that were locationless/virtuals), but I feel a certain problem that was experienced in the past with government authorities not liking our exact coords of victorian mailboxes might be likely to raise its head. From past dealings they'd probably like the pubs, but I cant see them too happy about us logging a load of military establishments! Mind you if we see people attacking McD's we'll now know where they get their target list from!

August 16, 2005

Quick question.

I have 500 finds. A few are virtuals. Does this now mean that the total number of finds will also drop if the virts are being moved?

1.8k · August 16, 2005

Having just spent some time reading the "Read this First" and FAQs as well as some of the new categories, I am now feeling punch drunk.

But from what I have understood I think I am going to be happy to migrate my virtuals to Waymarking since I have always thought of them as ways of getting people to find things and places they might ohterwise miss (with two exceptions both abroad where I get a lot of fun getting emails from all over the world giving different views of their findings). So far though I can't see how to migrate them where they would go into a subcategory - maybe when I am fresher I will see how to create a sub category but at the moment it has me beat.

August 16, 2005

Don't think I'll bother, thanks very much

Now... if we could convince TPTB to shift all web cam caches, earth caches and micro caches as well as virtuals and locationless caches over to the other place... That would be nice, wouldn't it? It would leave the g.com site clear for all the proper caches... you remember surely.... the ones in plastic boxes and ammo cans

You forgot to add Multi's & Mystery caches to the list to be moved over

3.8k · August 16, 2005

Quick question.
I have 500 finds. A few are virtuals. Does this now mean that the total number of finds will also drop if the virts are being moved?

No all finds will stay as they are, Logs and all

All the caches will be grandfathered untill archived.

August 16, 2005

Wow are we dissapointed at this, the controls on category seem just a bit loose. But then they have to be created by the "we're not going to be waymark police". The topics listed so far seem ok, though not quite sure how you get a blogger, surely their coords move when they go to get supersized at a McD they are Waymarking so they are not a fixed point

some topics might be good (the type of thing that were locationless/virtuals), but I feel a certain problem that was experienced in the past with government authorities not liking our exact coords of victorian mailboxes might be likely to raise its head. From past dealings they'd probably like the pubs, but I cant see them too happy about us logging a load of military establishments! Mind you if we see people attacking McD's we'll now know where they get their target list from!

It wasn't HMG that didn't like the Post box coords being published, it was the Royal Mail. They were worried that too many were being stolen.

August 16, 2005

Err!! Whats going on!!!!

Totally confused, don't mind an odd "Virtual" but isn't the point to find a "cache" at the end.

In my back garden, is the grave of Smokey the cat, can that be at waypoint?

WHAT'S SPECIAL ABOUT THAT I HERE THE CRIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well he did have only three legs!!!

Come on, he did eat his dinner out of a tubberware box!!

There is intelligent life on this planet but don't worry I'm leaving soon!!

Blimey, time to leave? Think Mars could do with a few caches!*%$!!*

Nick

1.6k · August 16, 2005

Don't think I'll bother, thanks very much

Now... if we could convince TPTB to shift all web cam caches, earth caches and micro caches as well as virtuals and locationless caches over to the other place... That would be nice, wouldn't it? It would leave the g.com site clear for all the proper caches... you remember surely.... the ones in plastic boxes and ammo cans

You forgot to add Multi's & Mystery caches to the list to be moved over

Don't really wanna move them, d'ya? At least there is a 'real' cache to find, log and have fun re-hiding again!

The Day Has Arrived At Last - Sort Of!

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment