The Day Has Arrived At Last - Sort Of!

[+Hi-Tek]

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!

 

You can also do that with a Micro

[+Learned Gerbil]

So the point of this new activity is to reduce Geocaching ot searching for tupperware? Everythign else seems in the sights of those promoting Waymarks - that seems a shame to me - one of the joys is the variety.

 

Instead of a few interesting virtuals and a few quirky locationless caches, we are going to have some very strange categories. I have suggested what I thought wasa sensible and challenging one, but there seems little interest -people are more interested in fast food outlets and coffee shops. If we can score on the new site for coffee shops, working just off The Strand in Central Lonsdon, I know I could list and photograph the location of over 30 in less than an hour - where is the challenge in that?

 

Some people seem to think this will create useful databases of locations, but there are loads of sites out there that have databases of locations for use with things like TomTom. For example, someone can list "Saxon Churches" for example. I know where I can freely download a file listing the coordinates in digtial form that I can then use to quickly record over 500 of the things. Even if I have to photo them, I can use TomTom to take me straight there- it is not like I need to research to find them or anything, or will need to just stumble across them.

 

Finally, I know people will be responsible for maintaining categories, but sites that create POI databases find this very hard to enforce. Many databases have incorrect entries or are out of date. Who corrects them? Presumably they should be self correcting as people go to the location, find it is not there and correct the coordinates. Even then the owner has to monitor what is going on and confirm corrections or the database ends up chaotic.

 

I know this is still pretty embryonic, but so far I feel it is taking somethign from GC without adding anything nearly as good as what we are losing.

[+HazelS]

I had a good read of the new site yesterday, and while out caching some "proper" caches last night, we discussed the merits of the "new" sport!!

 

We concluded... we'll carry on caching... running round logging hidden boxes of tat, but we'll also check back and carry on with the virtuals. We have been taken to some fabulous locations where a cache is simply not appropriate.

 

We joined the sport because of it's quirkiness (ie searching for boxes of treasure) not to spot McDonalds!!!

[+Happy Humphrey]

LG,

Some good points there, but bear in mind that the only reason we had

a few interesting virtuals and a few quirky locationless caches

was due to the moratorium on new virtuals / locationless caches, which has been in place for quite a while. If new ones had been allowed, we'd be complaining about GC.com searches being cluttered with non-caches, trig points and thousands of "lame" virtuals. This way, they can easily be ignored by those that aren't interested.

 

Look at Beds Clangers response to illustrate that this was a good decision:

isn't the point to find a "cache" at the end

- now the geocaching.com listings will suit Beds Clangers, Stuey, Pharisee etc so much better, and they can simply forget about Waymarking.com (until they've logged all the caches they can get to!).

 

For those that want more variety, it's easy enough to check Waymarking.com for categories that hold any interest - perhaps none do at the moment, but once it's open to all members there may be some good virtuals and locationless to go after.

 

HH

[+Learned Gerbil]

I agree that the limits on virtuals etc helped ensure that the existing ones were interesting. But don't you see that the new site just goes too far the other way? I can't see it being easy sifting out the mundane when 99.9% of it is mundane.

 

BTW, when I popped out for a sandwich I noticed that the local McDonalds has its own McCafe coffee shop inside - I will so enjoy being able to log that one twice!

[+dino-irl]

I guess thats where the rating system comes in. Everyone can rate a category and you can set your display within the profile to display a restricted list of waymarks based on their ratings. For example you could show the top 10% only.

 

Saying that ratings are very personal and most people will only rate categories that they actually like rather than ones they don't. I think its gonna take a few months for all the rubbish to sink to the bottom and the cream to float on top. I'll reserve judgement until then.

 

There's also the answer for those people that aren't impressed that its not compulsory. If you don't like it then don't do it

[+[MF]taz]

sounds like a great idea, what would be great is a way of using it to keep SAT-NAV maps like Tom Tom up to date. I was only thinking the other day that having pubs on Tom Tom or on any SAT NAV / GPSr would be a great idea.

 

Unfortunatly I cant access the site, as i'm not a premium member (in fact i've only found one cache) but look forward to seeing it when it goes public.

[+The Forester]

I cant see them too happy about us logging a load of military establishments!

Only last year some completely innocent anoraks were thrown into jail by the Greek authoriities for planespotting near a Hellenic Air Force base. It cost them a fortune in legal fees to avoid receiving very lengthy prison sentences.

 

The evidence against them was that they were equipped for espionage.

 

What was that equipment? Notebooks, mobile phones, printouts, maps, digital cameras and GPSrs. Exactly what you's expect to find in the possession of many a geocacher!

 

If Waymarking becomes as deservedly popular as locationless geocaching did, then it's only a matter of time before some poor sod is either arrested or shot while gathering information to file a Waymark logreport in this ill-considered category.

 

It's not only in London tube stations that armed men have a policy of shooting first and asking/answering questions afterwards. In half a hundred African and Asian countries that's standard operating procedure around the periphery of military bases.

 

The Byzantine review process which has been adopted (for now) by the new website for "Categories" is ill-considered and based on the ghastly model of Usenet (yes, really!), but I think this category of Military bases is particularly ill-considered.

 

Cheers, The Forester

[+Learned Gerbil]

taz' date='Aug 17 2005, 04:25 AM'] sounds like a great idea, what would be great is a way of using it to keep SAT-NAV maps like Tom Tom up to date. I was only thinking the other day that having pubs on Tom Tom or on any SAT NAV / GPSr would be a great idea.

 

Unfortunatly I cant access the site, as i'm not a premium member (in fact i've only found one cache) but look forward to seeing it when it goes public.

There are already loads of free POI databases for applications like TomTom for example, there are over 4000 pubs at http://www.poihandler.com/. If you have a PC then the free POIEdit will automate keeping the POI file on your PDA synced with the one online.

[+[MF]taz]

taz,Aug 17 2005, 04:25 AM] sounds like a great idea, what would be great is a way of using it to keep SAT-NAV maps like Tom Tom up to date.  I was only thinking the other day that having pubs on Tom Tom or on any SAT NAV / GPSr would be a great idea.

 

Unfortunatly I cant access the site, as i'm not a premium member (in fact i've only found one cache) but look forward to seeing it when it goes public.

There are already loads of free POI databases for applications like TomTom for example, there are over 4000 pubs at http://www.poihandler.com/. If you have a PC then the free POIEdit will automate keeping the POI file on your PDA synced with the one online.

Thanks very much, never even thought to look.

 

would be nice to visit all those pubs if i spot you in one Mr. Gerbil i'll buy you a pint.

[+Learned Gerbil]

In testing there is a way of automating the syncing of a TomTom database of all cache locations. This is explained in the forums at www.geocacheuk.com but you need to be a premium member of GC.com for it to work.

[+Skippy and Pingu]

Having given this new website a fair amount of time over the last 24 hours I think that for me its a good move. We're not too keen on virtuals although we have started doing locationless ones and found some of them quite fun. Now we can easily ignore all things we don't care about.

 

As for it becoming a directory of pubs, McDonald locations and WiFi spots - could be useful if you are in an area you don't know and you are hungry or thirsty or you want to check geocaching.com for close by caches .

[+Gralorn]

I feel that Waymarking is a completly new thing, it is not even within GC.com. We should stick to what we already do best and enjoy. So there must be more variety to locationless(Reverse) caches as the US has a majority that we cannot hope to achieve, OK then an alternative would of been to permit each Premium Member in the UK, should they of wished to, add a UK Locationless(Reverse) cache on the already available site. This would boost the variety and give a few new ideas to the site also.

Just my view for what it is worth. I like finding caches in woods, etc far better, but if one comes across something Locationless(reverse)then record it. That reminds me why can a site ie; Clifton Suspension Bridge only be logged once. Why cannot all other geocahers also log their find. We do for the tupperware boxes and ammo boxes, so why not a locationless ?? That's it, said my bit.

[+Wadders]

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

My sentiments excactly , quite happy with the one site! same with the british geo-coin. Keep it all on one site. i don't want to keep going to this site then that site.

good luck to those of you that do though.

[+Haggis Hunter]

If Waymarking becomes as deservedly popular as locationless geocaching did, then it's only a matter of time before some poor sod is either arrested or shot while gathering information to file a Waymark logreport in this ill-considered category.

Didn't stop you from logging a find on the same type of category for locationless. Logging an SAS establishment is even more ill considered!!

 

I must admit though, that I am uneasy with this category, you are NOT allowed to take pictures of military establishments, and you can be arrested for it, even in this country.

 

For the record, I logged a cadets barracks, and with the permission of the owner of the locationless, gave bogus co-ords

[+Alibags]

My initial impression is that I am distinctly unimpressed. I see no merit or interest in logging McDonalds and although it could be argued that it's nice to be able to find a coffee bar, pub etc wherevere you are, I reckon that sifting through all the chaff will make this pretty thankless. The expression train spotting comes to mind.

 

I am glad that Waymarking stats will apparently not add to one's geocaching stats. The site can be safely ignored by me, then.

[+bargee]

  The expression train spotting comes to mind.

 

Please don't malign us railway geeks

[+Skippy and Pingu]

That reminds me why can a site ie; Clifton Suspension Bridge only be logged once. Why cannot all other geocahers also log their find. We do for the tupperware boxes and ammo boxes, so why not a locationless ?? That's it, said my bit.

I didn't read it that way. I think waymarkers can be logged multiple times, can't they? Pointless if they can't.

[+Learned Gerbil]

I can't see how we can ignore it if it means that current caches will be migrated off GC.com. I am not a great fan of locationless (done two - one because of a very topical link to Dr Who, and the other because it allowed me to log a road named after my parents), but have done some very good virtuals. As I understand the confused messages in the forums, locationless will be migrated across, then virtuals, webcams - even talk of mysteries when all the mysteries I have ever done have been regular or multi-caches that just happened to involve some degree of problem solving.

 

The reason for this is to make sure that GC.com only has physical caches. Does that mean that armchair caches are OK to leave on GC.com as long as they are registered as a regular or multi? What about events? They are not "a box in the woods" that Jeremy keeps going on about.

 

Personally, I don't have too much of a problem with the new site, because I can ignore it (most of the proposed categories leave me speachless anyway - Graves over 100 years old anyone!). But I can't ignore the changes it is making here which seem unnecessary to me.

[+Gralorn]

I was not referring to the 'new' Waymarking sites only being able to be logged once, I was refferring to current locationless reverse caches. If you logged in the round building found by you in Melksham for instance with co-ords and photograph with your GPS in it, I could not log that same building with my photo, co-ords and gps, even though I came across it whilst on holiday from say Newcastle as it had already been logged. I would have to find another round building in the country that nobody else to date had come across. A bit harsh I personally think, especially for those new to geocaching as all the sites have been logged by the members of many years geocaching. Enough, I hear you cry. I also will give the waymarks a miss I think, stick to hunting on GC.Com.

[+Teuchters]

I'm disappointed that Earthcaches are going off to the new site - I have recently set some up that I thought were genuinely interesting. Unlike McD's...

But perhaps that is a personal opinion and some of the new (obscure) categories will appeal to someone somewhere.

I had planned a few Earthcaches more but perhaps I won't bother now.

[+Haggis Hunter]

I'm disappointed that Earthcaches are going off to the new site - I have recently set some up that I thought were genuinely interesting. Unlike McD's...

But perhaps that is a personal opinion and some of the new (obscure) categories will appeal to someone somewhere.

I had planned a few Earthcaches more but perhaps I won't bother now.

But you said you would do one just for me

 

No seriously, I agree with you, it will be a pity. hopefully what has already been approved will stay where it is?

[+Hampk]

I was not referring to the 'new' Waymarking sites only being able to be logged once, I was refferring to current locationless reverse caches. If you logged in the round building found by you in Melksham for instance with co-ords and photograph with your GPS in it, I could not log that same building with my photo, co-ords and gps, even though I came across it whilst on holiday from say Newcastle as it had already been logged. I would have to find another round building in the country that nobody else to date had come across. A bit harsh I personally think, especially for those new to geocaching as all the sites have been logged by the members of many years geocaching. Enough, I hear you cry. I also will give the waymarks a miss I think, stick to hunting on GC.Com.

This was the point I made earlier - a number of the locationless virtuals are actually harder than "a walk in the woods" - whether because the obvious sites are already logged or just because there aren't many examples of whatever it is.

 

Since you have to work (in some cases, *very*) hard for them, I personally feel they merit staying on gc.com and not be lumped in with snack bars and gravestones.

 

Incidentally - gravestones over 100 years old - don't forget our American friends haven't been around for *quite* as long as we have!!

[+Teuchters]

I'm disappointed that Earthcaches are going off to the new site - I have recently set some up that I thought were genuinely interesting. Unlike McD's...

But perhaps that is a personal opinion and some of the new (obscure) categories will appeal to someone somewhere.

I had planned a few Earthcaches more but perhaps I won't bother now.

But you said you would do one just for me

 

No seriously, I agree with you, it will be a pity. hopefully what has already been approved will stay where it is?

Well I could, but then it would have to go on the new site, which I have to say at first glance, I am not interested in.

The appeal was that GC was a one stop shop, warts and all. If you didn't like it, then you didn't have to log it. Or even visit it in the first place.

Now new Earthcaches will have to go to the new site whilst existing ones will be grandfathered. And possibly moved off by TPTB eventually. At which point I will probably spit the dummy completely.

I'm just waiting for my virtual Summit to Sea series to be shifted as well. Here's Jeremys take on virtuals:

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.

If you can understand that one, then you are doing well. I just can't get my head around it at all. Any one who works for the "Plain English Campaign"?

I note that HH has asked a couple of very simple questions on the new WM forums but has to answer them himself...

[+Pharisee]

I was not referring to the 'new' Waymarking sites only being able to be logged once, I was refferring to current locationless reverse caches. If you logged in the round building found by you in Melksham for instance with co-ords and photograph with your GPS in it, I could not log that same building with my photo, co-ords and gps, even though I came across it whilst on holiday from say Newcastle as it had already been logged. I would have to find another round building in the country that nobody else to date had come across. A bit harsh I personally think, especially for those new to geocaching as all the sites have been logged by the members of many years geocaching. Enough, I hear you cry. I also will give the waymarks a miss I think, stick to hunting on GC.Com.

There's quite a difference between 'proper' caches and Locationless caches. With a normal cache you hide a box and the general idea is that you gradually build up a list of cachers that find the box..... perhaps, one day every cacher in the country

If someone sets a locationless cache for, say, suspension bridges, then that cache setter wants to build up a list of suspension bridges... hopefully, every one in the world. What he/she doesn't want is that list to become a list of cachers that have all found the same bridge.... Once is enough. If you have to work a bit harder to log a find then so be it.

[+Happy Humphrey]

even talk of mysteries when all the mysteries I have ever done have been regular or multi-caches that just happened to involve some degree of problem solving.

Where did you hear that? Now migrating mystery caches WOULD be crazy...they're one of the mainstays of geocaching, as you imply.

[+2202]

I wont mince my words.

Its a load of bollocks.

I will be changing all my virtuals to micros.

[+Haggis Hunter]

I note that HH has asked a couple of very simple questions on the new WM forums but has to answer them himself...

Aren't I doing well

 

It is rather annoying that Jeremy has answered on my thread, but not to my questions. What answers are coming out are all double dutch.

[+Haggis Hunter]

I wont mince my words.

Its a load of bollocks.

It wouldn't be, if they would just give us a simple answer -

 

Are the current active virtuals and earthcaches, going to be moved or left as they are.

 

I personally don't care if there is a ban on any more being approved, but I do care about my caches that are currently active.

 

At the moment, I do not see a use for me on the other site. There is obviously a service there for other people so keep it and refine it, but lets not piss about with what we have already got running.

[+2202]

but lets not piss about with what we have already got running.

 

Too right.

Looks like a site for the mindless.

Edited August 17, 2005 by 2202

[+Learned Gerbil]

even talk of mysteries when all the mysteries I have ever done have been regular or multi-caches that just happened to involve some degree of problem solving.

Where did you hear that? Now migrating mystery caches WOULD be crazy...they're one of the mainstays of geocaching, as you imply.

Maybe I have misunderstood about Mystery Caches - maybe the posting I saw has been edited - I can't find it now - but there was a mention that everything that clearly wasn't a box in the woods would go and Mystery caches were lumped in among the webcams etc by the poster.

 

As for the mindlessness of most of the suggested categories so far - as I said - most leave me speechless!

[+Kelsborrow Wayfinders]

Don't think I will be bothering with this new Waymarking site. I have really enjoyed doing locationless and (some) virtual caches but they were enjoyable because they were not that common and provided a bit of variety. The main advantage was that no new ones were being created so there were just enough to make an interesting change.

 

I have often heard other cachers say they had a good idea for a new virtual or locationless category but I always felt that for every good one there would be about 20 completely useless ones and so many cachers would be creating them that the whole thing would become totally out of control and meaningless. At least there is now a website to mop up these ideas but I reckon it could soon grow out of all manageable proportion unless it is carefully monitored. Take a look at the forum for Waymarking Category Proposals - it's already generated some mad ideas.

[+Sensei TSKC]

I have looked at the new site and examined the so-called suggestions for categories.

 

What a waste of time! It is absurd. If the categories were decent ones and - like Pharisee stated - loggable once only then as a resource could be useful. However, the problem is going to arise with 'desk' loggers. Just purely finding the info from their desk. This takes all the fun out of the sport / hobby / pastime.

[+Happy Humphrey]

Mystery caches were lumped in among the webcams etc by the poster

In some areas, there aren't any Mystery caches, so perhaps the poster didn't really know what they are.

 

HH

[+Learned Gerbil]

Mystery caches were lumped in among the webcams etc by the poster

In some areas, there aren't any Mystery caches, so perhaps the poster didn't really know what they are.

 

HH

Quite possibly!

[nobby.nobbs]

i have to agree that i don't like the earth caches and decent vituals going to the other site.

 

i'm not going to wade through all the rubbish to find some good locations.

 

i've got a virtual in kew gardens, they don't allow a cache to be placed within grounds but i think it's a wonderfull spot that's well worth vistining. who's going to wade through piles of rubbish to find that out?

 

number junkies just logging loads of stuff like mcdonalds good luck to them but i think some discretion should have been applied to keep quality virtuals and earth caches etc on the gc site.

 

not all change is for the good.

[Lactodorum]

There is some understandable confusion as to how the two sites will interact at the moment. The new one introduces some brand new concepts which have yet to be fully developed. Even the team responsible at Groundspeak is still forming a complete understanding of its potential. However I'd like to state my understanding of a couple of fundamentals.

 

Waymarking.com will be the repository for any new Virtual caches and Locationless caches. I also believe it will host new Earthcaches.

 

Geocaching.com will continue to list physical containers in whatever form - Regular, Micro, Multi, Puzzles, Letterboxes etc.

 

Existing Virtuals and Locationless caches on Geocaching.com will remain on Geocaching.com.

 

Other than this I can only speculate.

 

So if you don't care about virtual/locationless caches don't bother with the new site. If you do, then your options will expand and you may well have to do a bit more work to find the sort of things that interest you. Conversely there will be many more possibilities.

 

As I said, this is my personal interpretation based on what I've seen over the past few weeks testing. It's not gospel so for a fuller discussion I urge you to visit and post in the Waymarking Forum.

Edited August 18, 2005 by Lactodorum

[+Chris n Maria]

The problem really is one of TPTB's own making. From the very early days of GC.com they have insisted on listing pretty much anything with no emphasis on quality. I can still place a magnetic micro on a lampost in a dull and uninteresting suburban street - and it would get approved.

 

People complained about this and the problem was seen as "lame virtuals" when actually the problem was lame caches (of any type). The same thing happened with locationless, rather than allow a few interesting ones loads were listed and the moaners started again.

 

Now the moaners have won, anything that is not a "box in the woods" has to go to the other site where it will disappear in a sea of noise (Mcdonalds, Graves over 100yrs..etc). How easy would it be to find my very favourite virt (historic castleton) on the new site?....next to impossible. Yet again on the new site there seems to be a "list anything - no matter how dull" mentality.

 

I, like many others, will not be using the new site. As I have no interest in locationless caches. I do like traditionals, multis,virts,webcams,mysteries,earth caches and all the other variations in between that make the game so interesting.

 

Was it really so difficult to avoid caches you wern't interested in?

A sad day indeed

Chris

Edited August 18, 2005 by Chris n Maria

[+Learned Gerbil]

In Jeremy's "Read Me First" posting he said -

 

"Do existing locationless caches go away?

 

Eventually, yes. Although we do plan, with permission, to transfer the existing locationless caches to the new Waymarking site, existing locationless caches that do not transfer will be allowed to remain on the geocaching.com web site until the end of the year. Existing locationless caches that do transfer to Waymarking.com will be archived and the listings will be locked. It is up to the locationless cache owner whether to transfer their category."

 

He also said -

 

"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, but we do not guarantee they will remain listed forever. We'll see how Waymarking goes."

 

and

 

"Are any other categories being removed from Geocaching.com?

 

Yes. Most likely web cam caches and Earthcaches will be moved to the Waymarking site. As with virtuals, existing maintained listings will remain active on geocaching.com for the near future."

 

In an exchange on Waypointing -

 

4agers - "OK, so since the two websites are seperate entities virtuals will remain on geocaching.com?"

 

Jeremy - "Virtuals aren't really caches, are they? I mean in the real sense of "a container in the woods." Or are you just arguing for argument sake?"

 

The evidence is clear - Jeremy thinks Virtuals do not belong on GC.com and it looks like anythign that is not "a container in the woods" is at risk.

[+walkergeoff and wife]

This is getting silly. I posted an antiquity on the Directory Home > Things > Historic Things > Antiquities site.

 

There has been one log, from someone in the US - unlikey I say, and now if you log on to the directory home, Things has no subdirectories any more.

 

Visit Scutchamer Knob here, and check it out. I know that it is a Beta product, but how can I see my post, when the directory no longer, apparently, exists?

[+Haggis Hunter]

The evidence is clear - Jeremy thinks Virtuals do not belong on GC.com and it looks like anythign that is not "a container in the woods" is at risk.

It certainly does appear that this is the case.

 

I can't see why the present maintained caches that don't have a box, can't stay as they are. I wouldn't be upset (although I appreciate other people will be) if they stop allowing all non container type caches. If they done that, the ones that are left will become unique and probably more interesting for newbies to find, as they will through time start to become fewer and fewer.

 

What is annoying me at the moment, is that you can't get a clear answer on the Waymarking forum...........

 

Are they hiding something??

[+[MF]taz]

speaking as a someone who is new to all this and found out about geocaching from the website that I bought my GPSr and was looking for something different to use it for.

 

I think thats what a lot of people are looking for, a way to use that gadget so it dont end up being used once on a camping trip and then put back in the box till next year.

 

GeoCacheing gives people added value from their GPSr, and as a side effect create a community driven to forward the sport.

 

imo they should continue the beta project of wayfinding, but it looks like they are making a mistake by removing the Virtual Cache option from the main website, as it has become part of geocaching and should stay that way.

 

Perhaps guidelines to what makes a VC a VC and not just a WP, such as a VC includes some kind of riddle or clue that needs to be solved before you can log it.

[+Happy Humphrey]

Why doesn't someone add a "UK Virtual Caches" category to Waymarking.com? Then those that like virtuals can just add a link to this to their favourites (favorites?)...

[+Haggis Hunter]

Why doesn't someone add a "UK Virtual Caches" category to Waymarking.com? Then those that like virtuals can just add a link to this to their favourites (favorites?)...

Jeremy has said that he does not want regionalised categories.

[+Skippy and Pingu]

Why doesn't someone add a "UK Virtual Caches" category to Waymarking.com? Then those that like virtuals can just add a link to this to their favourites (favorites?)...

Jeremy has said that he does not want regionalised categories.

There are already suggested regional categories - Veteran Memorials US only, Ghost towns in Canada, 911 memorials (would be US only) to name a few.

[+The Knights who say Ni]

Just added a few Waymarks of my own, and it occurs to me that some Trigpoint waymarks could 'compromise' certain Multi-Caches out there that rely on data from Trigpoints along the way! As I entered a couple that I'd visited on the trail of certain Caches recently, I had to be careful not to give away any details that might spoil those Caches. In particular if you reference the Cache you were looking for at the time when creating/logging or add the Flush Bracket number, which might form part of a clue in the multi, you are giving some detail away

[+Happy Humphrey]

Trigpoint waymarks could 'compromise' certain Multi-Caches

 

That's already a useful feature of trigpointing.com, which has been used to bypass the ascent of a hill on one of my caches. I don't mind at all: there's still a stiff walk to reach the cache.

 

HH

[+The Knights who say Ni]

Trigpoint waymarks could 'compromise' certain Multi-Caches

 

That's already a useful feature of trigpointing.com, which has been used to bypass the ascent of a hill on one of my caches. I don't mind at all: there's still a stiff walk to reach the cache.

 

HH

True. And I suppose people can 'short-circuit' a Cache in all sorts of ways anyway, Googling all sorts of useful info, so its up to them how to play the game and this could just be seen as 'useful'.

[+ryme-intrinseca]

I just have to put my oar in here!

 

I have mixed feelings about the new site. If stupid categories continue to be added, then this is definitely one to be avoided!

 

For the time being, the virtual and Earth caches that already exist will still be available on GC.com. Brilliant, let's be geocache 'purists' then, and stick to using the quality site. No's of finds, etc, are kept separate, so we're not going to lose out that way.

 

As I see it, those who are really going to lose out are those who want to post genuinely interesting and well thought out virtuals and Earthcaches. If the rules for these types of caches had been followed to the letter, then maybe there wouldn't have been a problem to start with, and we could have carried on happily as we were.

 

*******

 

Suggestions for new Waypoint categories that would most likely be accepted:

 

1. Lamp posts

2. Clouds

3. Stuff in the world (doesn't matter what it is - an ant, door knobs, cheese graters, car parking spaces, toilet rolls, paperclips) - log it all.

[+The Knights who say Ni]

I can see a certain use for this if there were the ability to get a GPX download of 'All my local Caches and their local amenities'.

 

That way, I could quickly find a Pub for a beer after a long trek and a DNF, or somewhere to eat, dare I say it... McD... no I can't

 

I know this can be achieved already by shopping around for POI's etc, but because it's linked to Geocaching.com, there are all sorts of cool possibilities there.

 

It will need contributors who are strolling around out there with GPSr's though, ie us.

Ok, so there isn't a game element to that, and it's a great shame Virtuals etc are being moved, but it still has many useful possibilities.

Edited August 18, 2005 by The Knights who say Ni