Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm slightly confused at the moment on what is going to happen to the virtuals, webcams & earthcaches that are currently listed on GC.com.

 

Can someone tell me what grandfathered actually means?

 

Will I be forced to transfer my virtuals & earthcaches across to waymarks, or can they stay as they are permanently?

 

Once any type of cache including locationless get transfered, will this change our find & placed stats on GC.com?

 

If you find a waymark will your find be logged against your GC.com account?

 

I apologise if any of this has already been addressed, but at the moment it is still slightly confusing.

Link to post

I'm just as confused as you are.

Will this go on my count of caches?

Will locationless caches that I've already logged now become waymarks?

Will Waymarking become as seperated from geocaching as benchmarking is? That might be a good thing.

Link to post

The big question is: what happens to the locationless logs?

 

As I unterstand it a locationless cache is equivalent to a category. But a category can't be logged directly. You have to create a waymark (= virtual cache) inside that category first so others can log that waymark.

 

But what if I'm not interested in creating and maintaining a waymark but only in logging a find (of a not yet existing) waymark? :rolleyes:

 

Cornix

Link to post

I understood that the logs remain.

But when a locationless GC is transferred here, how does it look like?

I mean the WM pages look so different, do I need to create the whole description page again in a new format or is there any automation in the transfer process?

<_<:huh::rolleyes:

 

Furthermore:

The logging system seems very different:

Let's say I create a category of Goldmines.

Then anybody can add a new goldmine or log the already existing goldmine under this category.

Did I get this correctly?

Until now the locless caches generally allows only one log per one goldmine, now the same place may be logged several times.

No need to search and remove duplicates :(

Edited by Erwast
Link to post
Let's say I create a category of Goldmines.

Then anybody can add a new goldmine or log the already existing goldmine under this category.

Did I get this correctly?

I guess that's right. But by adding a new goldmine (waymark) you are in fact creating a new 'virtual cache' that you are responsible for. You have to deal with the category owner who must 'approve' your waymark and you have to check the logs of the visitors if they met the requirements. :)

 

That sounds like a lot of work for such a simple task.

 

Cornix

Link to post
As I understand it a locationless cache is equivalent to a category. But a category can't be logged directly. You have to create a waymark (= virtual cache) inside that category first so others can log that waymark.

There seems to be an awful lot of overcategorisation in the new listing system for what used to be called locationlesses.

 

Previously, if a locationless met the rules of geocaching and was worthy of approval, then it was approved and that was that. Subsequently, if someone wanted to subdivide locationlesses into categories, as Buxley did, then they were free to do so.

 

Under the new system, the categorisation mania has put the cart before the horse.

 

Now, a "waymark" (aka locationless) is deemed not worthy of existence unless it has already been categorised before it comes into existence. George Orwell would chuckle!

 

It's as if Butterflies are to be deemed not to exist because they are neither Bats nor Birds nor Biplanes.

 

Cheers, The Forester

Link to post

No virtuals will be approved on geocaching.com once this goes live. You will need to apply the virtual as a new waymark to an existing category, or suggest and implement a new category for this waymark. I am pretty sure that new categories will crop up every day where just about anything on the planet can be categorized.

 

We haven't decided whether to just stop new virtuals and webcam caches, or archive them entirely, though I believe we will just leave them on the site for now. Locationless caches will be archived at the end of the year but all of your logs will be available to you as well as the archived locationless description.

 

No data from geocaching.com will be migrated over to Waymarking.com. Any new waymark category will start fresh. However, we will do our best to inform previous locationless cache loggers so they can apply their log to the new Waymarking site.

Link to post
No virtuals will be approved on geocaching.com once this goes live. You will need to apply the virtual as a new waymark to an existing category, or suggest and implement a new category for this waymark.

I'm guessing yes but I'll ask anyway cause I'm a glutton...

 

Will this include parks where caches are not allowed/possible?

Link to post
Will this include parks where caches are not allowed/possible?

The distance between geocaches and waymarks will be irrelevant, and there are no existing rules where a waypoint can be marked. That's the old geocaching mentality.

 

Using ESP I do expect that some locations will upset the natives, but so is life. It will be an interesting ride. Caves anyone?

Link to post

I accept that no more virtuals are going to be allowed, it was already extremely difficult to get one approved anyway.

 

What is concerning me is that I own two virtuals, one which is a multi, and you just simply cannot place a container as it is in Royal Botanic Gardens. I have also got 2 earthcaches, one that I spent 7 hours driving and 5 1/2 hours walking to set up.

 

If you decide to move these categories across, will the caches that are already live be left in place?

My virtual in the gardens has always had good feedback and my day long earthcache has only just been set up. I would hate to see them being moved to a site that I haven't really decided on whether I am going to use yet.

Link to post

They will remain cacheless. Actually many reviewers have found out that parks are refusing caches merely for the fact that virtuals can be there instead. This "well you do have the option to use virtuals" has been a standard response by some park managers and perhaps a cacheless park is the best way to energize the local geocachers to change policy.

Link to post

 

Can someone tell me what grandfathered actually means?

 

Will I be forced to transfer my virtuals & earthcaches across to waymarks, or can they stay as they are permanently?

 

I have had to sift through the different pages to get the answers that I was looking for, however the above two questions, I still don't know the answers to.

 

Can anyone help with a positive answer?

Link to post
I have had to sift through the different pages to get the answers that I was looking for

Say Haggis Hunter... did you find a proof positive answer for find statistics somewhere.

 

Will existing logs on GC.com remain?

 

Will WM logs be a separate set of statistics from those on GC? i.e. if I log a WM then this will NOT appear on my stats on GC.com?

Link to post
I have had to sift through the different pages to get the answers that I was looking for

Say Haggis Hunter... did you find a proof positive answer for find statistics somewhere.

 

Will existing logs on GC.com remain?

 

Will WM logs be a separate set of statistics from those on GC? i.e. if I log a WM then this will NOT appear on my stats on GC.com?

I believe existing logs will stay, and WM logs will not appear on your GC.com account.

 

A couple of UK cachers have logged WM's and haven't had them credited to their GC account.

Link to post

Can someone tell me what grandfathered actually means?

 

In nongeocaching terms, it means sticking to the set of rules that exsited at the time of issue, even if those rules change where newcomers must start with the newer rules.

 

OK, I guess it's hard for me to define - here's an example:

 

When I started college a certain set of required classes exsisted to earn my degree. After two years, those requirements changed (now required economics for a biology degree <_< ) Since I started under the old requirements, I was "grandfathered in" and didn't have to take economics - I was allowed to stick to my original requirements, but everyone starting new had to meet the new requirements.

 

There are probably alot better examples, but that one is the only one I can come up with now.

 

E

Link to post

I think the question that I haven't seen clarified, is will virtuals be "grandfathered", meaning current ones will stay active (as have grandfathered moving caches) or will they be forced to move and archived here? As has been stated for locationless caches.

Link to post
No virtuals will be approved on geocaching.com once this goes live.

No data from geocaching.com will be migrated over to Waymarking.com.

Could I request that an exception be made for Earthcaches? These are a well defined category in their own right, and it doesn't seem sensible to split them across two sites. I don't care which site they all end up on, but I think they should be removed from one or the other.

Link to post
No virtuals will be approved on geocaching.com once this goes live.

No data from geocaching.com will be migrated over to Waymarking.com.

Could I request that an exception be made for Earthcaches? These are a well defined category in their own right, and it doesn't seem sensible to split them across two sites. I don't care which site they all end up on, but I think they should be removed from one or the other.

I would like to be able to search from caches (or waymarks) and have come up with a list of waymarks nearby, kind of like the search nearby caches option, maybe some filter options. If this would be possible.

Link to post

This thread is now going completely off subject, can either Jeremy or someone at Groundspeak, give me an answer to the questions at the beginning of this thread.

 

I have aired my concerns in a few threads now, a few of which Jeremy has replied in, but to my knowledge no one from Groundspeak has answered them. All I want at the moment is an answer. After all this thread was started two days ago.

Link to post
What questions are still unclear?

Mainly these two please -

 

Can someone tell me what grandfathered actually means? Not a term used in the UK.

 

Will I be forced to transfer my virtuals & earthcaches across to waymarks, or can they stay as they are permanently?

Link to post

Grandfathered generally means allowed to continue under the rules that applied when something was created.

 

For example, there are some moving caches that existed before the guidelines were changed to not allow them. They were "grandfathered" and allowed to remain active rather than being shut down just because the guidelines changed.

Link to post
Yes my mistake, that only leaves the grandfathered term please.

Since you require a Groundspeak answer, I'll answer. Grandfathering in this case is no longer allowing new (webcam, virtuals) but allowing the existing ones to be listed as long as they are maintained.

Link to post
Yes my mistake, that only leaves the grandfathered term please.

Since you require a Groundspeak answer, I'll answer. Grandfathering in this case is no longer allowing new (webcam, virtuals) but allowing the existing ones to be listed as long as they are maintained.

Ahhh, so it means not backdating the rules. If only someone had said that earlier things would have been a tad clearer.

Link to post
Yes my mistake, that only leaves the grandfathered term please.

Since you require a Groundspeak answer, I'll answer. Grandfathering in this case is no longer allowing new (webcam, virtuals) but allowing the existing ones to be listed as long as they are maintained.

Thank you, that has now cleared that up for me.

 

Should have listed this link earlier, I guess:

 

Grandfathered Definition

 

As you can see from the definition, it is indeed an American term, hence why most of us Brits didn't understand.

 

Thanks for the help, some of the explanations that have came out in the last few days, have been double dutch to say the least, and going by the thread in the British forums, most of us have been confused.

 

As my questions have now been answered I am going to close this thread.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...