View All Locationless Caches?

[+VegasCacheHounds]

I just happened to notice that there is still the option of viewing all Locationless caches listed on the Hide or Seek a Cache page on GC.com. It just gives an empty search page, but still, shouldn't this be removed?

 

 

Not complaining, just making an observation about something that may have been overlooked....

[+Turtle3863]

But when you click on it you get nothing I miss them allready

Edited January 12, 2006 by Turtle3863

[+tozainamboku]

I just happened to notice that there is still the option of viewing all Locationless caches listed on the Hide or Seek a Cache page on GC.com. It just gives an empty search page, but still, shouldn't this be removed?

Shouldn't it link to Waymarking.com?

[+Harry Dolphin]

No. Waymarking is an entirely different site.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

No. Waymarking is an entirely different site.

Yes, but it's the new home to locationless caches

[+robert]

No.  Waymarking is an entirely different site.

Yes, but it's the new home to locationless caches

Locationless caches were archived, though.

 

Waymarking.com is the site for waymarks, not locationless caches (which don't exist anymore). There are waymarks that are similar to locationless caches that were once listed on gc.com but it's not correct to lump them into the same pile, IMHO.

[+tozainamboku]

No.  Waymarking is an entirely different site.

Yes, but it's the new home to locationless caches

Locationless caches were archived, though.

 

Waymarking.com is the site for waymarks, not locationless caches (which don't exist anymore). There are waymarks that are similar to locationless caches that were once listed on gc.com but it's not correct to lump them into the same pile, IMHO.

Last year, locationless cache owners were given the oportunity to create Waymarking categories for their locationless caches since the locationless cache were going to be archived. Many locationless owners did this. Groundspeak has also created many Waymarking categories for locationless caches whose owners did not and has found people willing to adopt and manage these categories.

 

Now suppose that Joe Cacher remembers that there was a locationless cache for Polka-dot houses, and was driving down the street with his camera and GPSr when he saw a polka-dot house. He takes a picture and gets the coordinates. He then gets on geocaching.com and searchs for the polka-dot houses locationless. But wait - it's been archived . A link to Waymarking.com will point him to the place where he should now be looking to find the polka-dot house category and log his waymark.

[+baloo&bd]

But wait - it's been archived . A link to Waymarking.com will point him to the place where he should now be looking to find the polka-dot house category and log his waymark.

Then by the same token, if they find a WG dollar or marked paperback, there should be links to Where's George or Bookcrossing.

 

In the case of Waymarking and Geocaching, while web sites have the same owner, they are two entirely different websites and or concepts.

 

There was a lot of warning, not only in the forums but many of the locationless caches themselves listed the unpcoming demise.

[+tozainamboku]

In the case of Waymarking and Geocaching, while web sites have the same owner, they are two entirely different websites and or concepts.

Yes, Waymarking and Geocaching are different sites and yes many people are looking at Waymarking only as a replacement for locationless and virtual caches and missing the fullness of the new concepts that can be explored there BUT ...

 

The history is that geocaching did have locationless and virtual caches. Whether or not you agreed that these were were caches, many people did look for locationless and virtuals. During the moratorium on new locationless caches, one could still log them, as one can still log grandfathered virtuals. During the moratorium, we were promised that a solution would be forthcoming for locationless. When Waymarking was annouced it was presented as that promised solution. I find it absurd to use the argument that Waymarking is not Geocaching as a reason that there shouldn't be links between the two. Frankly, I'm getting a little tired of the puritans who would ban any mention that a geocache was ever anything but a container with a log and would erect a barrier between their "pure" game and any derivative that others may want to participate in. If you don't want to find the locationless that have moved to Waymarking don't click the link.

[Jeremy]

I just happened to notice that there is still the option of viewing all Locationless caches listed on the Hide or Seek a Cache page on GC.com.  It just gives an empty search page, but still, shouldn't this be removed?

Shouldn't it link to Waymarking.com?

It does now. There are some places on the web site that still need links off to Waymarking.com - we'll have a few more updates next week.

[+baloo&bd]

Frankly, I'm getting a little tired of the puritans who would ban any mention that a geocache was ever anything but a container with a log and would erect a barrier between their "pure" game and any derivative that others may want to participate in. If you don't want to find the locationless that have moved to Waymarking don't click the link.

First, it looks like your wishes have been granted. Having said that, before you jump on me as a "puritan". go look at my stats. Quite frankly, if we did away totally with containers holding what, imho, is garbage, I would be all for it. I am in it for the hunt. I also was not in favor of locationless going away. Waymarking and locationless caches are two different things.

 

My post was based on logic, not agenda.

Edited January 13, 2006 by baloo&bd