We're Currently Not Accepting Proposals

[Jeremy]

During the transfer stage of locationless cache listings to waymark categories, we are not going through the process of adding new waymark categories that are not existing locationless caches. We're also still working through the waymark category creation process. You are welcome to join in on the discussion.

 

We are excited as you are about the possibilities! We just want to make sure we start out on the right foot.

Edited August 16, 2005 by Jeremy

[+Dog Whisperer]

This isn't about categories, per se, but about subcategories. The FAQ (or at least something I read) says premium members can create subcategories. I found no way to do it. For example, under Natural Places, I found no appropriate subcategory for waterfalls, rock formations, canyons/gorges, etc. So if I wanted to post one of those as a waymark, I couldn't, or would have to post it inappropriately (i.e., under hot springs, for example). I found similar lack of appropriate subcategories elsewhere, as well. Your comments, advice, etc. are appreciated.

 

By the way, I think Waymarking is a great idea, and appreciate all the hard work that obviously went into it.

 

Dave

[Jeremy]

categories are categories, regardless of whether they sit under one category or not. the term subcategory just means that it is a category under another one. All waymark categories are subcategories since they sit under person, place, or thing.

 

Don't worry about the taxonomy. When we start accepting proposals it is more important to help explain what the proposal is for, not where the category should go. If you like lighthouses just say lighthouses. If you want to suggest a new taxonomy location for it that is fine but not necessary.

[+The Leprechauns]

I only like *landlocked* lighthouses. I think all other lighthouses should be destroyed and pushed into the body of water that they are close to. The waymark subcategory taxonomy ought to be "landlocked lighthouses" and "lighthouses that aren't cool enough to be landlocked."

[+Dog Whisperer]

I was not particularly worried about "taxonomy." I was commenting functionality. I.e., the very limited number of "categories" or "subcategories" for participatants to log entries. Users may not log entries in any category in which subcategories exist. We must log entries in one or another of the subcategories. Many times those subcategories are inappropriate. If that comes down to "taxonomy" in your view, that's fine. But it comes down to "functionality" in my view. I understand that this is just starting and a lot of things have to be worked out. I was merely commenting on functionality. Once again, thank you, and everyone else, for a tremendous job.

[+tiki-4]

For all of us who like and/or use lighthouses can we put The Leprechauns on the 1st one that gets tipped in???

 

Dont you think the process will be laborous for subcategory submissions?

General group comments about categories under the 3 major titles would be logical. Sub-cats should be commented by those who operate in them.....

[+Team Adelos]

I posted a prososal, but missed the this message. Sorry about that.

 

Paul

aka Adelos

[+Sandrich]

Do you have any timetable for accepting new categories (or subcategories)?

[+Mudinyeri]

Do you have any timetable for accepting new categories (or subcategories)?

Excellent question!

[+GeoCraig]

I've noticed new waymarks that aren't converted locationless caches. At the same time, I notice the "Not Accepting Proposals."

 

Where are the new waymarks coming from?

 

When are new categories going to be accepted?

 

Has there been a decision regarding the fate of locationless caches (I favor grandfathering them in gc.com)?

[+Turtle3863]

I've noticed new waymarks that aren't converted locationless caches. At the same time, I notice the "Not Accepting Proposals."

 

Where are the new waymarks coming from?

 

When are new categories going to be accepted?

 

Has there been a decision regarding the fate of locationless caches (I favor grandfathering them in gc.com)?

I have noticed this as well. I really want to embrace this site but feel that some are getting a first shot in the back door. I have a particular group of geocaches that do not work that well as caches and I need a category of Civil War Markers to place them. I understand that the locationless must be integrated first, but I hope that new categories will open soon.

[+Gustavo]

I accept the fact that you need to "get all ducks in a row" before accepting new categories.

 

I propose (or will so when the time comes) for your to include Cemetaries as a category. Under it could be historic, pet, strange, spooky, etc. Cemetaries should be considered an important category, considering all our fallen heros and loved ones.

 

I have a waymark to put in tonight, so I'll put it in under either historic places or lodging (final lodging) (ha!).

 

Thanks for building such a great site!

 

Gustavo

[+ibycus]

I've noticed new waymarks that aren't converted locationless caches.  At the same time, I notice the "Not Accepting Proposals." 

 

Where are the new waymarks coming from?

 

When are new categories going to be accepted?

 

Has there been a decision regarding the fate of locationless caches (I favor grandfathering them in gc.com)?

I have noticed this as well. I really want to embrace this site but feel that some are getting a first shot in the back door. I have a particular group of geocaches that do not work that well as caches and I need a category of Civil War Markers to place them. I understand that the locationless must be integrated first, but I hope that new categories will open soon.

I think its based on what Jeremy et al. feel would best represent the potential of the site. There is no real formalized decision, its just so that when the site officially goes live, there is a variety of types of waymarks to show the potential.

 

So really category proposals aren't being accepted 'per se' as there is no real formalized decision process, its just based right now on "wow that really represents something that we should have to show x about the possibilities for the site."

 

Speaking as the owner of the "Off leash dog parks" category, there was no secret handshake or anything to give me special access, more of an 'act of god' type of thing.

[+NomadVW]

I'm not quite certain I see how "off the leash dog parks" have a "wow" factor yet the other 12 pages of ideas don't have any that fit the bill.

 

If "We're not currently accepting," I would think that means new ones wouldn't be created. Otherwise, it should say "We're not currently accepting, excepting ....."

 

Fact is, there is currently a "Waymark category approval" process. I'd just like to know what it is so I can re-post my ideas to meet this requirement. Until then, I don't get why anyone is posting their proposals just so they'll slowly work down the list to disappear.

[Jeremy]

I'm not quite certain I see how "off the leash dog parks" have a "wow" factor yet the other 12 pages of ideas don't have any that fit the bill.

You're thinking about virtuals and locationless caches still, not waymarks. They don't necessarily have to have a "wow" factor. You also justified why virtuals don't work because the "wow" factor was so arbitrary. Many people would say "wow" to look up the nearest off leash dog area to them.

 

At this point we occasionally look around and when a particular category has been well thought out and discussed, we put it on the site. There's also a lot of disclaimers for current waymark category managers that they may have to put it into group management at some point, so "ownership" and "first shot" could be pointless concepts anyway. My recommendation would be to help flesh out whatever category you want and look at existing ones to get ideas on how these categories can be defined. There's more to it than taking a category and going with it. There are fields you should choose so each new waymark will have useful information to share with others.

 

The "dibs" on former locationless caches is now over so once the site is launched in early November those categories will be available for management by someone other than the original locationless cache owner.

[+TeamAO]

When can we expect to see waymark proposals being accepted again?

[+NomadVW]

You're thinking about virtuals and locationless caches still, not waymarks. They don't necessarily have to have a "wow" factor. You also justified why virtuals don't work because the "wow" factor was so arbitrary. Many people would say "wow" to look up the nearest off leash dog area to them.

Actually, I'm not referring to the "wow" factor of locationless or virtuals, but am more referring to the previous poster's idea that:

 

So really category proposals aren't being accepted 'per se' as there is no real formalized decision process, its just based right now on "wow that really represents something that we should have to show x about the possibilities for the site."

 

Apparently the concept that people can find "off the leash dog parks" has something that the other 12 pages of proposals don't have. Folks - or maybe it's just me - wanna know what that category had that their category did not have.

 

Fact is, category proposals ARE being accepted based on a criteria at Groundspeak that transcends the debates here in the forums.

 

Is there anything we can do to meet this criteria?

[Jeremy]

Is there anything we can do to meet this criteria?

You could be patient.

[+ibycus]

They don't necessarily have to have a "wow" factor. You also justified why virtuals don't work because the "wow" factor was so arbitrary. Many people would say "wow" to look up the nearest off leash dog area to them.

Actually, I'm not referring to the "wow" factor of locationless or virtuals, but am more referring to the previous poster's idea that:

 

So really category proposals aren't being accepted 'per se' as there is no real formalized decision process, its just based right now on "wow that really represents something that we should have to show x about the possibilities for the site."

 

Sorry, poor word choice on my part. Really what I meant was more along the lines of "This is a different kind of waymark that may be representative of a class of waymarks that might be interesting to see on the site, something some people might get excited to see, and help them see some of the possibilities that the site presents".

(really I'm just guessing here, as the process from my end was essentially "We've been looking over some of the categories, and we think this one might be a good one to implement. Would you like to manage it, (with the understanding that this whole thing is beta right now, and the whole management structure is likely to change in a heartbeat at any time we might feel like doing so)." my reply "Yep, sounds good to me." )

 

To me there seems to be a few classes of waymarks out there:

 

1. Locationless caches that have been transferred across (find a _____, and list it). Mostly hard to find, scavenger hunt type things.

2. Yellow page type listings (Find a McDonalds etc), things that can be looked up elsewhere, but there may be a special reason to list them here.

3. Feature listings. Things that there is no direct listing for anywhere, but aren't really that hard to find, if you know the area. Kind of a sharing of special regional knowledge.

 

Most of the category proposals fall in to the first category. Find a unique ____.

Some fall in to the second category.

 

If we look at the categories that have been listed recently,

Automobile Association signs (1)

Ansel Adams Photo Hunt (0)     

News Article Locations (1)         

Wikipedia Entries (17)       

Natural Arches (2)             

Campgrounds (3)             

Rock-Hounding (2)           

Art*o*mats (3)                 

Off-Leash Dog Areas (12) 

Boy Scout Camps (7)       

 

We see 3 in the first category, 1 in the second category, and 6 in the third category.

 

The reason I said that proposals weren't being accepted per se, is because there is no formalized process. It is simply based on the thoughts of TPTB (their preference, and how the general reaction to the category seems to be). Asking them to tell you why one category is approved, and the others aren't is like asking you to justify why you like a certain type of ice cream. Obviously this 'process' isn't satisfactory, which is why (a) they are putting together a 'proper' process for approving categories and ( they aren't really accepting all that many categories. (but they are accepting some, so that when the site officially goes live, there is a range of categories, that represent some of what they feel the possibilities for the site are, rather than just a big ol' bunch of locationlesses)

 

Anyways, the entire above could be completely off base, and is based only on my personal impression of what is going on.

[+Moag Ohana]

Is there anything we can do to meet this criteria?

You could be patient.

I just put one in for consideration.

Do I be patient for a week? a month? 3 months? Let us know when to check back so you don't get bugged by everyone every few days (unless your into that???)

 

Is there an estimation when all of this comes to fruition??????

[Jeremy]

If you want a definite timeline, I'd push any more automated style process to 3 months from now. That way if it happens sooner you'll be happily surprised.

 

So make it February 1st to be on the safe side. If it changes sooner we'll send out a notification so make sure to check the link that you want to be emailed by the site when there are changes.

[+Jake39]

Good day Jeremy,,

 

This is in response to the previous log and your answer ----there would be a time line of 3 month.....

 

When you open the 'Waymarking.com' page it says.... (for non-members)

 

QUOTE: At this time, we are only allowing Geocaching.com Premium members to preview the Waymarking.com website. If you are not a Premium member, please check back "in a couple of weeks" when we open the site up to all types of members.

 

Would it not be more appropriate to say ...check back in the future ?

 

Mahalo a nui...Jake

[Jeremy]

The 3 month timeline is related to when we're accepting new proposals through a formal (or informal) process.

 

With that said it is possible that the site will be available to non PMs rather soon, so it will make the message moot either way.

[+dino-irl]

I'm confused

 

Are we able to add new categories or not?

 

I don't see the point in proposing a category if the process isn't up and running yet

[+winged fox]

I was trying to get a virtual site approved back in August when I ran into the NO MORE block. I did not know that they were being eliminated. Then I was turned toward Waymarking with the "Soon to be accepting Proposals for Categories " block. Now I see that I might try being patient until maybe February before Waymarking gets ready to accept suggestions for viable points of interest outside "McDonalds" and "Dog Runs"

I guess what I am saying is "Fugetit"

[+chstress53]

Hello winged fox & dino-irl

Might I suggest that you post your Catagory Proposals in the Proposal forum anyway, what I have noticed is that if it is a well liked catagory and other cachers say so with their thoughts on the topic, it may become a Catagory quicker. I posted one that way and I am now a proud Catagory owner of Art O Mats, That is also how the Dog Parks came about too, because viewers responded in the affirmative regarding their idea. I remember in a thread somewhere that those suggesteed catagories that have already been proposed;that have not made it yet to Waymarking will most probably be among the first to become catagories when that part happens. I would not suggest waiting till Feb to make your proposal. Let everyone discuss your idea in the forum and it may become a Catagory before Feb. Mine did, as well as many others not just the dog Park waymark..

 

See it says here "How do I start my own category? How do I manage it?

 

1. You must be a Premium Member

2. Post a category proposal in the discussion forums.

3. Have your category published to the directory by Groundspeak (some revision may be required) (You get an invite by email, to own a catagory, so do not bug them as TPTB ARE CREATING A WAY COOL SITE.)

4. Once your category is published, you’ll be given tools to manage the category on Waymarking.com

 

We expect the process of category creation to change with time, but in the beginning the categories will be carefully chosen by Groundspeak with the guidance of the growing Waymarking community via the discussion forums."

 

The only way to get a catagory is to post in the forums for vis discussion, Read number 2 AGAIN that is "the Point" if you want a catagory I suggest not to "Fugetit" as winged fox said BUT POST your Catagory proposal IN THE THREAD FOR ALL TO DISCUSS.

Edited November 5, 2005 by chstress53

[DaanVindtZe]

During the transfer stage of locationless cache listings to waymark categories, we are not going through the process of adding new waymark categories that are not existing locationless caches. We're also still working through the waymark category creation process. You are welcome to join in on the discussion.

 

We are excited as you are about the possibilities! We just want to make sure we start out on the right foot.

I would like to move my locationless cache "Hokjesgeest/BoxMinded" to coordinate play.

But:

a. there is no subcategory to put it in (there is one proposal which would fit)

b. it should be possible to add pictures to the logs

which doesn't seem to work (I tried at:

[DaanVindtZe]

During the transfer stage of locationless cache listings to waymark categories, we are not going through the process of adding new waymark categories that are not existing locationless caches. We're also still working through the waymark category creation process. You are welcome to join in on the discussion.

 

We are excited as you are about the possibilities! We just want to make sure we start out on the right foot.

I would like to move my locationless cache "Hokjesgeest/BoxMinded" to coordinate play.

But :

a. there is no subcategory to put it in (there is one proposal which would fit)

b. it should be possible to add pictures to the logs

which doesn't seem to work (I tried at:

* http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/details...02-b0e339417188

en

* http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/details...13-ba05fcd3ae02

 

So Jeremy could you please :

a. approve the subcategory or open the main catgeory for adding waymarks?

b. enable the possibilty to add pictures to logs for this (sub)category?

[+Jake39]

The "dibs" on former locationless caches is now over so once the site is launched in early November those categories will be available for management by someone other than the original locationless cache owner.

 

If I contact an owner of a 'locationless' site and and there is no response and his category has not been transfered, is it fair game to propose his category here, for me to apply for consideration? He joined in Sep.2001 but is still only a 'Member' and hasn't signed in either, for a while.

[+chstress53]

[The time period that was offered to the owners of locationless to be transfered has expired,

 

I quote

"The "dibs" on former locationless caches is now over so once the site is launched in early November those categories will be available for management by someone other than the original locationless cache owner."

 

Sorry ! DaanVindZe But others now have dibs.

 

Jake39 If I were you I would just look at the locationless caches on GC.com and then do a search on Waymarking if it does not come up. I would post a request that you would like to create a catagory. Siince the time expired for the owners to transfer they are now fair game to us all., so there is no need to contact the owner.

Edited November 15, 2005 by chstress53

[+NomadVW]

Sorry ! DaanVindZe But others now have dibs.

 

Jeremy has made it clear in a number of threads that "dibs" doesn't even really exist. Proposing a category does nothing for "ownership" of the category. It simply opens up discussion on whether or not that category is suitable for the site. Whether or not you receive management ability for a category you propose for discussion is still up to... well.. discussion.

 

PS> Not a gripe, I just wanted to be first to make the clarification.

[+chstress53]

"Jeremy has made it clear in a number of threads that "dibs" doesn't even really exist. Proposing a category does nothing for "ownership" of the category."

 

I disagree, I proposed several in this forum and I became a Category owner of one of my proposals. If others like it by discussion and it is well received by Groundspeak they email you and together you set up the Catagory page.. If you propose first , its you who become category owner at least for now.

Edited November 15, 2005 by chstress53

[Jeremy]

We occasionally see good ideas and post them as categories. That isn't the same as people getting dibs over one category or another. OpinioNate has been warning category managers that this is a beta period and things may change over time.

[+catcher24]

Just posting so I will automatically receive new posts. Thought I had posted to this before, but I guess not.

[+Jake39]

OK...now that clears that up. I will now propose my other favourite 'hobby'

 

NOW>>> What in the 'ell are 'dibs' ?????

[Jeremy]

I call dibs to answer your question. Unfortunately I won't answer it so no one will be able to.

[DaanVindtZe]

OK...now that clears that up. I will now propose my other favourite 'hobby'

 

NOW>>> What in the 'ell are 'dibs' ?????

Dibs is a common convention used among friends or siblings to reserve or declare full or partial ownership of a community resource, such as a chair or communal food. As an example, when deciding who gets prime seating in front of a television, if there is one chair that is particularly desirable, an interested party can call "dibs" on that chair; as long as no one has previously called the chair, then it is agreed that the caller is entitled to sit there.

 

from wikipedia

[+Jake39]

Got-cha ....Now I remember it being used many..many.. years ago, but hadn't heard it lately.

T'ANKS for your answer !!!

Gee...Now there is another category

[OttoDeLupe]

How would I go about cross-referencing waymarks? IE, a waymark that fits two or more (sub)categories? Can I provide multiple categories when creating a waymark? Is this functionality that's intended to be supported? - Otto

[Jeremy]

You create a separate waymark for each category. We will have functionality to link these waymarks together (or "stack" them) in the future. This will help you to find related or "identical" waymarks - though different categories may contain different variables.

[+TeamGuisinger]

I've a couple ideas for categories.

 

1. Relocated agregate. (ie. glacial deposits found in most northern states) Usually are giant boulders that have been used as landmarks by hunters and woodsmen for decades.

2. Of course make sure the Native American trail marker trees makes it back on.

3. Home of ___ signs found entering a town highlighting what person it is the home of.

4. Beaver dams.

5. Find an arrowhead, mark it, photograph it before it's picked up. (this one could be challenging and could take several tries, but could also be cheated)

6. Pre 1900 graffitti. It's definately out there.

7. A Guisinger gravestone.

8. A train tunnel, with a train in it.

9. A traffic camera.

10. An intersection of more than 4 roads.

 

I'm not sure if any of these are taken or not, and a few may not be interesting enough, but ideas all the same.

dibs

Edited December 4, 2005 by TeamGuisinger

[4wheelin_fool]

I've a couple ideas for categories.

 

<snip>

6. Pre 1900 graffitti. It's definately out there.

Now that would be interesting. Stone Mountain outside of Atlanta (just east) has many carvings in the giant rock(graffitti) as you go up the trail, from the early part of the 1900s and some from the late 1800s.

Also inside of the art museum in Phila. there are some very old archways, and cloisters with graffiti that is hundreds if not thousands of years old. Very interesting.

[Parrolet]

Can we have a category of "Fallen Heros" memorial? Related to any person that lost their life during a time of service. Example one I have in mind is a statue at our sheriffs office has a life size statue that was dedicated to the fallen sheriff officers of our county with the date of dedication and their names on a plaque.

[+TeamGuisinger]

Can we have a category of "Fallen Heros" memorial? Related to any person that lost their life during a time of service. Example one I have in mind is a statue at our sheriffs office has a life size statue that was dedicated to the fallen sheriff officers of our county with the date of dedication and their names on a plaque.

We have a micro honoring a young soldier who gave his life for our freedom. It's near a plaque erected in a war memorial park.

[+Papa Chanoli]

Woops, I posted a new category idea before I noticed this post too!

 

Maybe these ideas will get some attention as time goes by.

 

Sorry if my suggestion was ill timed though.

 

Thanks for all you do Jeremy and staff

 

Papa Chanoli

[theonlyguy]

This isn't about categories, per se, but about subcategories.  The FAQ (or at least something I read) says premium members can create subcategories.  I found no way to do it.  For example, under Natural Places, I found no appropriate subcategory for waterfalls, rock formations, canyons/gorges, etc.  So if I wanted to post one of those as a waymark, I couldn't, or would have to post it inappropriately (i.e., under hot springs, for example).  I found similar lack of appropriate subcategories elsewhere, as well.  Your comments, advice, etc. are appreciated. 

 

By the way, I think Waymarking is a great idea, and appreciate all the hard work that obviously went into it.

 

Dave

I would like to see a forum for Waterfalls and Hot-Springs too, I have a partial list for the B.C. Canada area and would like to find coordinates to the Hot-Spring names I have without coordinates. I would be interested in a forum I could post in regarding such things..

 

I posted a message on www.trailpeak.com

In the "Coodinate conversions" area but that site dosn't seem to have the traffic that this "Groundspeak" forum has and with all the knowledge geocachers have they probably have what I am looking for.

 

TheOnlyGuy

 

[+Lady and the Conductor]

I noticed there's a locationless cache (In Search of Steam) not on Waymarking and I was wondering if I could claim it as my waymark? Also, How would I go about it?

[+Roamineye]

I would like to see a forum for Waterfalls and Hot-Springs too, I have a partial list for the B.C. Canada area and would like to find coordinates to the Hot-Spring names I have without coordinates. I would be interested in a forum I could post in regarding such things..

 

This is a great idea for a category!!

[+Team GeoDuo]

Check out these links:

 

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/default...21-b95d5fb45fb8

 

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/default...03-2bca766e1704

[+loumarday]

Are you still not taking new category ideas? Just checking since the original post was dated August 2005. Just in case, I do have an idea that could be its own category or maybe a sub-category of Buildings. How about independent bookstore around the country...not your Barnes & Noble, Borders, etc types but those bookstores that are quickly being overrun by the big guys and are becoming as scarce as mom and pop restaurants (or other businesses).