Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
tozainamboku

Which Category?

Recommended Posts

If you are using Waymarking like a locationless cache seeker, you look for interesting categories and try to find waymarks in them. But if you want to use Waymarking as a substitute for hiding a virtual cache, you might have a problem. While you no longer have to convince a volunteer approver that your location has "Wow", you do have to find a category for your location and convince the category manager that your location fits. The problem is that categories are still being created. There may not be any existing categories (yet) which can be used for your locations. There may several you could chose from, but none that really describe what you found special in that place. Here are a few examples (mostly from virtuals that I have done). No claim is made that any of these have "Wow" but all were approved as virtuals at some time.

 

GC42B8 Rocky Oaks

Simply a spot in a National Park Service area where physical caches not allowed. Confirmation involves counting stairs. Might fit in a nice view category or in a category for hiking destinations.

 

GCA8AD LarsThorwald's Psycho

This might qualify as a movie location or a movie set, but the interesting thing about this waypoint is that it is simply a spot on residential street that offers an unusual view of the backlot at Universal Studios. It might also fit in a suprise category, but given the cache description I don't think there is much of a suprise.

 

GCGG91 Solstice Madonna

I suppose there could be a religious statues category, but if this were listed as a religious statue, I wouldn't bother with it. A better category may be meditation spots or, since you have to hike to it, hiking destinations.

 

GC5121 Wanna see a card trick

Definitely would need a suprise category to list this one.

 

GCB22C Walk the Block

Would the category be unusual building materials? No, too esoteric. You might be able to use a suprise category. Might be a Pennsylvania State Historic Marker here and you could use that category :ph34r:

 

GC937D What's the Point Virtual

The problem with this is that at one site you find multiple categories: Architecturely interesting bridges, Octogonal Buildings, French Language Schools.

 

GCGK2D Don't Fence Me In

This is my virtual. I don't expect a category for sheep corrals. Perhaps one for abandon agricultural structures (corrals, pens, barns, windmills, etc.) A hiking destinations category would also work here. It may be mute as this cache is in the middle of the fire area that is burning near Los Angeles right now. Although the structure is metal, it may be gone if the fire was hot enough. :laughing:

Edited by tozainamboku

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think placing a waypoint in the hierarchy should be difficult.

 

Here's my thinking. A category can be created to fit a need. It will be open and uncurated. A group can "adopt" it later the same way as they can start their own category. Process for need-based category creation to be determined later.

 

This would alleviate the square peg-round hole syndrome that can lead to ugliness for someone who wants to place a virutal that doesn't fit anywhere else.

Share this post


Link to post

Yup.

 

Every Virtual Cache should eventually fit into a Waymark Catagory.

 

Even if you have to Manage the Catagory to do it.

 

:P The Blue Quasar

Share this post


Link to post

Does anyone have any ideas how multi-virts may fit in?

 

I have one that I originally intended to have a physical cache at the end, but turned out was not possible. I DID get approval for the cache as a multi-virt, but don't quite see how this will fit into Waymarking unless I list each stop as a separate waymark (which I don't want to do). This would defeat the purpose of finding the first spot, collecting info and plugging it in to find the next stage.

 

The particular theme of this caches is very unique, so much so that it probably wouldn't warrant having it's own category. I don't know of any other locations that fit the narrow theme of my cache. While there may also be a few around, I would bet that the total number in the US would be less than 10. My locations might fit another more generic category, but this would certain lessen the meaningfulness of the locations as I originally intended them.

Share this post


Link to post

To me Waymarking fits great in either replacing locationless caches or virtuals, but not both. I think that there should be 2 main categories specifing virtual or locationless then go on from there. Searching from your home location should give you results similar to virtuals. However if you search in a certain area, any of the waypoints of the locationless type would have already been found. Whats the point?

 

Plus many geocachers (myself included) use locationless caches to add to their cache counts. For me I have already found all of the caches in my immediate area. Without me driving way out of my way, I am stuck with nothing to find until someone else hides one. Will the Waymarking stats and geocaching stats be incorporated into each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Does anyone have any ideas how multi-virts may fit in?
Do they have to?

 

I have one that I originally intended to have a physical cache at the end, but turned out was not possible.
I don't understand how a physical cache would not be possible. I did an interesting multi once. It was a bunch of murals on downtown buildings. The murals had no plaques or anything on them with numbers. So the "hider" had us count things in the murals. Number of horses in one, number of people in another, number of hot-air balloons in another. The final cache was a keyholder stuck to a metal pipe under another mural. It actually all tied in nicely together.

 

I guess my thought is, if its a multi anyways, why not just add one more step and hide a box at the end?

Share this post


Link to post

I won't pretend to know what a 'multi-virt' is.

 

But regardless, if it is a Virtual then it should be able to become a Waymark.

 

The thing that a Waymark has that a Geocache don't is that a Waymark must be some item to look at. Whether it is of interest to you or not. A Geocache doesn't have this requirement.

 

:) The Blue Quasar

Share this post


Link to post

Do they have to?

 

If virtuals will be eventually disappearing from gc.com in favor of the new site, then there should be a way to handle this eventuality. The site has done a great job handling the many possibilities that can be encountered when hiding a cache. I'd hate to see them start eliminating options.

 

I don't understand how a physical cache would not be possible.

 

Let's just say that the area in question was private property, so no permission means no hidden container, but yet there was a reasonable expectation of some public access so that folks visiting to collect info from the virtual location would not stand out from other non-caching visitors.

 

I guess my thought is, if its a multi anyways, why not just add one more step and hide a box at the end?

 

While I suppose this could have been done, it would have required adding a location that would not fit the theme of the existing multi stages. I preferred to limit the locations to those fitting the theme of my cache, and since I was able to get approval, left it as such.

 

I won't pretend to know what a 'multi-virt' is.

 

It's like any other multi-cache, except all of the stages are virtual. There is no box at the end (or anywhere in between for that matter).

 

But regardless, if it is a Virtual then it should be able to become a Waymark.

 

I agree, especially if it comes down to no longer being grandfathered into gc.com. I'm perfectly happy to leave it exactly as it is, but also wonder how similar hides are expected to fit into the new structure?

Share this post


Link to post

I know of another kind of mult-virt. There could be several waypoints that you needed to visit in order verify that you completed the virtual. Here are a couple of examples

 

GC1980 Disneyland Geocaching

 

GC3975 The City of the Angeles

 

I think I may have suggested elsewhere a Guided Tour category where you could provide a list of waymarks. Jeremy says that they are looking into some enhancements that would add Routes and Tracks to Waymarking. Perhaps after these enhancements are made there will be categories where "multi-virts" would fit.

 

There have been example given of puzzle/mystery virtuals. They might be appropriate in the suprise category if there is one.

Share this post


Link to post
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

×
×
  • Create New...