Interesting One...

January 9, 2006

New Features in the works!
We're always working on new features for Premium Members. Here are a few items of interest that have not been implemented (yet):

* New Solution for Locationless Caches - Coming Soon!

This is going to be good considering they've removed them all from Jan 1st <_<

1.9k · January 9, 2006

I think removing em was the solution <_<

January 9, 2006

I thought Waymarking was supposed to be the solution.

3.8k · January 9, 2006

They do tend to be a bit behind on their updates, despite giving the International date for CITO being the 22nd April 2006, their link sign still says 2005.

1.7k · January 9, 2006

I thought Waymarking was supposed to be the solution.

it is :huh:

January 9, 2006

If Waymarking is the solution what on earth was the question. :huh:

1.9k · January 9, 2006

If Waymarking is the solution what on earth was the question.

"Whats the worst idea we have had today ?"

1.4k · January 9, 2006

If Waymarking is the solution what on earth was the question.

How can we kill off anything that might add variation to the game?

1.7k · January 9, 2006

If Waymarking is the solution what on earth was the question.

How can we get other people to put together databases of information that we can sell to other sources?

T

2.2k · January 10, 2006

oooh you cynic!!! :unsure:

January 10, 2006

But don't forget that this is a solution availible only to Premium Members so if Waymarking was the solution, why is it availible to everyone ??

Does anybody care anyway :unsure:

Confused.... you should be :anibad:

January 10, 2006

But don't forget that this is a solution availible only to Premium Members

Waymarking is open to all. Am I the only one who hopes it develops into something useful and fun ?

2.5k · January 10, 2006

'Hope', no

'Believe', yes!

:unsure:

2.9k · January 10, 2006

Waymarking is open to all. Am I the only one who hopes it develops into something useful and fun ?

Try geocaching tour guides travel bug rescuers could be another good one.

What about wainrights, munroes, marylins, corbetts, welsh 3000ftrs etc.

As a family we currently have no interest in the new site but there again we had no interest in virts or locationless on this site either.

We may be tempted by peak bagging when Aaron gets older though and we do log the occasional trig point.

January 10, 2006

What about wainrights, munroes, marylins, corbetts, welsh 3000ftrs etc.

All good category ideas. Why not propose them on the forum. I did that for waterfalls and it was accepted. :unsure:

2.5k · January 10, 2006

I thought Waymarking was supposed to be the solution.

it is

Is it?

To me it looks more like a problem!

So when is the solution to the problem arriving? :unsure: :lol:

3.7k · January 10, 2006

I'm not that keen on virtuals and locationless, and was glad to see them moved away from the main site, but I'd like to log a few Earthcaches - but there are none in the UK, as the Brits tend to be a bit slow setting these things up! :unsure: Get on with it!

Edited January 10, 2006 by Happy Humphrey

January 10, 2006

So when is the solution to the problem arriving?

I'm working on web service at the moment which includes a random quotation at the foot of each page it serves. I spotted these two pearls in the code, which seemed quite appropriate to the spirit of this thread...

"If you think the problem is bad now, just wait until we've solved it." ~ Arthur Kasspe

"Our problems are mostly behind us. What we have to do now is fight the solutions." ~ Stult's Report

:lol:

3.8k · January 10, 2006

I cant find anything (apart from the trigpoints, which I log on T:UK) within 50 miles of me. The nearest is one I set up at Drayton manor Theame park (0 logs yet)

Edited January 10, 2006 by Deego

January 10, 2006

I'm not that keen on virtuals and locationless, and was glad to see them moved away from the main site, but I'd like to log a few Earthcaches - but there are none in the UK, as the Brits tend to be a bit slow setting these things up! Get on with it!

Here are 3 Earth Caches in the UK and there may well be others, these just happen to be the ones I have come across.

GCN6EP

CGQ5FQ

GCQ5G2

I haven't actually done any of these yet. The 2 Scottish ones it was blowing a full gale and puuring with rain when I was passing them. But the Severn Bore I am intending to do in March

3.8k · January 10, 2006

I think he means on Waymarking.com thats where his link points too.

1.5k · January 10, 2006

I think he means on Waymarking.com thats where his link points too.

That's really odd. When I clicked on them they took me to the geocaching web site, and I promise they are not in my browser cache.

Any explanations? I would have expected to go to the Waymarking site.

1.7k · January 10, 2006

existing earthcaches (like virtuals) are being kept in GC.com (grandfathering). However, no new ones will be allowed to be registered on GC.com - these must go on WM.com. HH presumably wants us to pull our fingers out and start setting up some new eathcaches, on WM.com! Some hope

Dave

3.8k · January 10, 2006

I think he means on Waymarking.com thats where his link points too.

That's really odd. When I clicked on them they took me to the geocaching web site, and I promise they are not in my browser cache.

Any explanations? I would have expected to go to the Waymarking site.

Just rodgers links go to geocaching.com, but HH link goes to Waymarking.com

January 10, 2006

I'm not that keen on virtuals and locationless, and was glad to see them moved away from the main site, but I'd like to log a few Earthcaches - but there are none in the UK, as the Brits tend to be a bit slow setting these things up! Get on with it!

Here are 3 Earth Caches in the UK and there may well be others, these just happen to be the ones I have come across.

GCN6EP

CGQ5FQ

GCQ5G2

I haven't actually done any of these yet. The 2 Scottish ones it was blowing a full gale and puuring with rain when I was passing them. But the Severn Bore I am intending to do in March

And this one, close to the Ridgeway

GCN18T

2.5k · January 10, 2006

I'm not that keen on virtuals and locationless, and was glad to see them moved away from the main site, but I'd like to log a few Earthcaches - but there are none in the UK, as the Brits tend to be a bit slow setting these things up! Get on with it!

HH

Just done a count of EarthCaches on GC.com within the UK, and there are at least 50 that I can see.

Moote

3.7k · January 10, 2006

There are indeed 50 on geocaching.com.

Sorry, I only checked on Waymarking.com.

(Shouldn't the British ones be moved across there to keep them together with the others?)

HH

2.5k · January 10, 2006

There are indeed 50 on geocaching.com.
Sorry, I only checked on Waymarking.com.

(Shouldn't the British ones be moved across there to keep them together with the others?)

HH

No not at all, keep everything one here, and if someone does not like them they have no need to do them. But the big wigs at GC.com don't see it that way.

Moote

3.7k · January 10, 2006

Nah, they work better on Waymarking.com. But let's not fall out over this trivia!

As a compromise, the full list is on Earthcache GSA.

HH

2.5k · January 10, 2006

Nah, they work better on Waymarking.com. But let's not fall out over this trivia!

As a compromise, the full list is on Earthcache GSA.

HH

HH

I think if the passed the your Waymarking totals through to the main GC.com site I would be happy, but they either did not think of this, or ignored it!

Fall out, you are too nice a chap to fall out with.

Moote

3.3k · January 10, 2006

(Shouldn't the British ones be moved across there to keep them together with the others?)

I'm keeping mine in geocaching.com where they belong

January 10, 2006

(Shouldn't the British ones be moved across there to keep them together with the others?)

I'm keeping mine in geocaching.com where they belong

Snap

2.5k · January 11, 2006

(Shouldn't the British ones be moved across there to keep them together with the others?)

I'm keeping mine in geocaching.com where they belong

Yes, mine also will stay here on GC.com, I think that it deserves to be seen by cachers.

6.5k · January 11, 2006

If Waymarking is the solution what on earth was the question.

Something like, I want to submit a Locationless how can I do this? Why can't I? When will I be able to?

The moratorium stemmed from continuous questions like, are locationless really caches? should they count? are they all so lame? why is everyone hating on locationless?. Which increased pressure to make them better, and eventally stop listing new ones till a better way of listing them can be set up. (sounds similar to virtuals doesn't it)

In some ways Waymarking is better than locationless and virtuals. Like can be listed now, no need to prove anything, and are not considered by 'saturation' guidelines.

some problems are that its on another website, few visit and it will take time to get people used to it.

oh, and theres nothing listed, so few visit, so noone wastes their time submitting new waymarks, so theres nothing listed

3.7k · January 11, 2006

The biggest problem with locationless was that geocaching.com couldn't handle them as it's really designed for geocaches. Did you ever try and search for a locationless? The only way was to just page through them - not very useful, as all you could see was titles of Waymarking ideas. No wonder there was a moratorium - imagine how useless a list of 10000 locationless caches would be with no categories! So geocaching.com would have needed a radical redesign to add categories just so we can organise listings of things that aren't even caches.

Hardly any geocachers liked logging locationless caches, and most didn't like having them in their numbers, so it wasn't a surprise to me when they were moved to a separate site. Virtual caches is a separate discussion, of course!

HH

January 11, 2006

Hardly any geocachers liked logging locationless caches, and most didn't like having them in their numbers

Can't "most" just delete their found logs if they don't lke them on their list ?

I like my list of locationles finds .

3.1k · January 11, 2006

I also like them, but I also understand why some people don't.

I will miss Locationless a little bit, I loved it when you saw something on your travels that you just KNEW fitted a locationless!!

January 11, 2006

(Shouldn't the British ones be moved across there to keep them together with the others?)

I'm keeping mine in geocaching.com where they belong

Here is a suggestion. Move them to WM.com, but sync the find counts across both sites so you see a GC total, a WM total and a combined total. For a limited time (perhaps 12 months) the older earth caches could still be search on GC.com and bounce you across to WM.com to look and log.

2.5k · January 11, 2006

I have no interest or intention of moving my earthcache across. If it becomes compulsary to do so then I will just archive the cache.

Why? Because when I have had a look at WM it has just failed to arouse my interest. I do not see me going over there to log McDonalds, food pubs, plastic dinosaurs or whatever, any time in the near future.

I am aghast at the idea of WM scores counting on GC. I hope this never ever happens. I like to think that some element of effort has gone into finding the caches that I have logged (including virtuals and locationless) and the idea that my stats would be listed in the same table as the McDonalds league? ... Urgh! Still, a quick drive round London and you could get to 1000 in no time (Then lets see the complaints about the congratulations threads!!).

3.3k · January 11, 2006

Did you ever try and search for a locationless? The only way was to just page through them

I thought searching for things was the whole point of Geocaching, and if you have to search for the locationless cache listing as well as the subject, then surely that's just an additional challenge

January 11, 2006

I think the floor in the WM.com idea is that people logged things before as a challenge, but when you can log anything that challenge has gone.

Although I have duplicated my webcam cache on WM.com I am not planning on adding any more or logging anything in the near future. That being said I took the decision to only log locationless caches that meant something to me and not just because I could.

2.5k · January 11, 2006

I took the decision to only log locationless caches that meant something to me and not just because I could.

So I guess "Doin' Hard Time" meant a lot to you Alistair! :lol: :laughing:

Edited January 11, 2006 by Moote

January 11, 2006

I'm not that keen on virtuals and locationless, and was glad to see them moved away from the main site, but I'd like to log a few Earthcaches - but there are none in the UK, as the Brits tend to be a bit slow setting these things up! Get on with it!

Try here for some earth caches in the UK, they are based around Yorkshire.... uk earthcaches Cheers MaxKim

2.2k · January 12, 2006

isn't it funny how quality is inversely proportional to quantity.

likewise my earth caches will be archived before i let them disapear into wm.com.

not been there and have no inclination to, though i used to enjoy the occasional thoughtfull loactionless.

1.4k · January 12, 2006

I think the flaw in the WM.com idea is that people logged things before as a challenge, but when you can log anything that challenge has gone.

Thanks you have just summed it up for me very well.

Chris

January 12, 2006

I took the decision to only log locationless caches that meant something to me and not just because I could.

So I guess "Doin' Hard Time" meant a lot to you Alistair!

Yes, it was close to where I lived for 10 years, and not because of any drunk and disorderly behaviour.

(Alistair now leaves to see if he can log where he was locked up for drunk and disorderly behaviour last night) :huh:

Interesting One...

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

Join the conversation