This Thread Is About Geocaching....

[+CowboyX]

...and how it has been hurt by Waymarking.

 

Especially urban geocachers.

[+Stunod]

Is there a rule I don't know about saying that a waymark "blocks out" an area from geocaches?

[+StarBrand]

huh?????

 

hurt??

 

It needs some refinement but I think Waymarking is fine and it has upped the creativity of hides (at least around here)

[+CowboyX]

Is there a rule I don't know about saying that a waymark "blocks out" an area from geocaches?

 

Yes, in that new virtuals and locationless caches have been "blocked out" of being created.

[+Stunod]

Is there a rule I don't know about saying that a waymark "blocks out" an area from geocaches?

 

Yes, in that new virtuals and locationless caches have been "blocked out" of being created.

 

Silly question...have you heard about Waymarking.com? There are locationless and virtuals over there.

[+StarBrand]

Is there a rule I don't know about saying that a waymark "blocks out" an area from geocaches?

 

Yes, in that new virtuals and locationless caches have been "blocked out" of being created.

To borrow from the other thread about virtuals.....

 

How is the experience of visiting a location any less on Waymarking then it is here (save the smiley)?

Edited June 6, 2006 by StarBrand

[+Deliveryguy428]

But I can still put caches in the same area as waymarkings...I think...?

[+CowboyX]

Is there a rule I don't know about saying that a waymark "blocks out" an area from geocaches?

 

Yes, in that new virtuals and locationless caches have been "blocked out" of being created.

 

Silly question...have you heard about Waymarking.com? There are locationless and virtuals over there.

 

Please post a link to one.

[+Stunod]

Is there a rule I don't know about saying that a waymark "blocks out" an area from geocaches?

 

Yes, in that new virtuals and locationless caches have been "blocked out" of being created.

 

Silly question...have you heard about Waymarking.com? There are locationless and virtuals over there.

 

Please post a link to one.

 

Here is a "replacement" locationless: Illinois Historic Markers

 

Here is a "replacement" virtual: Goose Island Brewpub

 

Feel free to log either one

[+BlueDeuce]

Ah, so the lack of new virtuals (and such) are hurting geocaching.

 

Well, personally I normally resist change but in this case maybe you should work on getting Waymarking to fulfill what is, in your opinion, currently lacking.

[+StarBrand]

Is there a rule I don't know about saying that a waymark "blocks out" an area from geocaches?

 

Yes, in that new virtuals and locationless caches have been "blocked out" of being created.

 

Silly question...have you heard about Waymarking.com? There are locationless and virtuals over there.

 

Please post a link to one.

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/details...3a-cff1f710d4fd

 

EQUALS

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...80-ade1b98d4bea

[+CowboyX]

Is there a rule I don't know about saying that a waymark "blocks out" an area from geocaches?

 

Yes, in that new virtuals and locationless caches have been "blocked out" of being created.

To borrow from the other thread about virtuals.....

 

How is the experience of visiting a location any less on Waymarking then it is here (save the smiley)?

 

Waymarking is little more than benchmark hunting. Virtuals and locationless were much different - and better.

[Jeremy]

But I can still put caches in the same area as waymarkings...I think...?

 

Yup. No restrictions (unlike virtuals of the past)

[+Stunod]

Is there a rule I don't know about saying that a waymark "blocks out" an area from geocaches?

 

Yes, in that new virtuals and locationless caches have been "blocked out" of being created.

To borrow from the other thread about virtuals.....

 

How is the experience of visiting a location any less on Waymarking then it is here (save the smiley)?

 

Waymarking is little more than benchmark hunting. Virtuals and locationless were much different - and better.

How?

[+BlueDeuce]

Is there a rule I don't know about saying that a waymark "blocks out" an area from geocaches?

 

Yes, in that new virtuals and locationless caches have been "blocked out" of being created.

To borrow from the other thread about virtuals.....

 

How is the experience of visiting a location any less on Waymarking then it is here (save the smiley)?

 

Well there's a category, temp event and pocket caches, hmmm? hmmm?

[+CowboyX]

Is there a rule I don't know about saying that a waymark "blocks out" an area from geocaches?

 

Yes, in that new virtuals and locationless caches have been "blocked out" of being created.

 

Silly question...have you heard about Waymarking.com? There are locationless and virtuals over there.

 

Please post a link to one.

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/details...3a-cff1f710d4fd

 

EQUALS

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...80-ade1b98d4bea

 

 

Makes me feel glad that I win.

 

One you actually have to do something - the other you simply log.

 

And that's a poor example of a virtual.

[+The Leprechauns]

Is there a rule I don't know about saying that a waymark "blocks out" an area from geocaches?

 

Yes, in that new virtuals and locationless caches have been "blocked out" of being created.

 

Silly question...have you heard about Waymarking.com? There are locationless and virtuals over there.

 

Please post a link to one.

How about 548 links to each Pennsylvania Historic Marker that's been entered so far in that Waymarking category? Recall that historic markers were among the objects deemed "too common" to qualify under the "wow factor" test for virtual caches. Thus, those 548 new opportunities to explore history are also 548 virtual caches that most assuredly would've been archived instead of being published, under the test for virtual caches that had been in place for the past several years prior to the launch of Waymarking.

 

I am very happy that Waymarking has expanded the opportunities available to us for sharing interesting locations. For example, I've waymarked every historic marker in downtown Pittsburgh (either as the owner of the waymark, or as the finder of someone else's waymark). It is a pain in the butt to get good satellite reception amongst office buildings, and to hide a micro in a place that won't be muggled and where permission and bomb squad callouts won't be an issue. Frankly, I don't miss the hunt for the film canister with the soggy scrap of log paper one bit. Waymarking allows me to focus on the history of the location instead.

 

I could go on and link to other categories. Are 548 links enough?

[+Stunod]

Makes me feel glad that I win.

[+CowboyX]

How is the experience of visiting a location any less on Waymarking then it is here (save the smiley)?

 

Waymarking is little more than benchmark hunting. Virtuals and locationless were much different - and better.

How?

 

Good virtuals include puzzles and clues, multiple locations and tasks - waymarks do not.

 

Anyone can log a waymark - anyone, anywhere - the challenge of locationless hunts was to find a unique location.

[+Stunod]

Waymarking is little more than benchmark hunting. Virtuals and locationless were much different - and better.

How?

 

Good virtuals include puzzles and clues, multiple locations and tasks - waymarks do not.

 

Anyone can log a waymark - anyone, anywhere - the challenge of locationless hunts was to find a unique location.

 

Create a new Waymark catagory to challenge someone to find that unique location. The cool thing about Waymarking is after someone finds that cool location first, others can log the location later.

 

You just haven't seen anyone make a puzzle-like waymark yet. Not to say it CAN'T be done...

 

edit to fix broken quotes

Edited June 6, 2006 by Stunod

[+CowboyX]

Is there a rule I don't know about saying that a waymark "blocks out" an area from geocaches?

 

Yes, in that new virtuals and locationless caches have been "blocked out" of being created.

 

Silly question...have you heard about Waymarking.com? There are locationless and virtuals over there.

 

Please post a link to one.

How about 548 links to each Pennsylvania Historic Marker that's been entered so far in that Waymarking category? Recall that historic markers were among the objects deemed "too common" to qualify under the "wow factor" test for virtual caches. Thus, those 548 new opportunities to explore history are also 548 virtual caches that most assuredly would've been archived instead of being published, under the test for virtual caches that had been in place for the past several years prior to the launch of Waymarking.

 

I am very happy that Waymarking has expanded the opportunities available to us for sharing interesting locations. For example, I've waymarked every historic marker in downtown Pittsburgh (either as the owner of the waymark, or as the finder of someone else's waymark). It is a pain in the butt to get good satellite reception amongst office buildings, and to hide a micro in a place that won't be muggled and where permission and bomb squad callouts won't be an issue. Frankly, I don't miss the hunt for the film canister with the soggy scrap of log paper one bit. Waymarking allows me to focus on the history of the location instead.

 

I could go on and link to other categories. Are 548 links enough?

 

Why not have both? -remember, this thread is about how geocaching has been hurt by the removal of virtuals and locationless caches that were supposed to "replace" them - well they don't. I've proved that.

[+CowboyX]

Gotta go.

[+The Leprechauns]

How is the experience of visiting a location any less on Waymarking then it is here (save the smiley)?

 

Waymarking is little more than benchmark hunting. Virtuals and locationless were much different - and better.

How?

 

Good virtuals include puzzles and clues, multiple locations and tasks - waymarks do not.

 

Anyone can log a waymark - anyone, anywhere - the challenge of locationless hunts was to find a unique location.

Nothing's stopping you from creating a waymark with a puzzle attached.

 

Nothing's stopping you from creating a multicache or puzzle cache that incorporates virtual stages, so long as it ends at a container with a logbook.

 

The overwhelming majority of the locationless and virtual caches I found -- more than 125 of them -- did NOT involve puzzles and clues, multiple locations and tasks. They are remarkably similar to waymarks.

 

As for the challenge of locationless hunts, that is still present: if you are the first to stumble across the location, you get to set up the waymark. That is like a locationless cache find. Then, other people see that waymark and can go visit it. Their visit is like a virtual cache find.

 

I am very much enjoying the serendipitous discovery of waymarks in my categories of interest as I drive around town. Pull over, take some coordinates, and prepare a photo essay. Had I submitted that spot as a virtual in 2003 or later, it would have a 5% chance of being published. Had I submitted the category that included that spot as a locationless cache in 2003 or later, the odds of publication drop to 0%.

 

So explain to me again how it is worse now?

[Pto]

Silly question...have you heard about Waymarking.com? There are locationless and virtuals over there.

 

I thought those things on Waymarking were waymarks?

[+The Leprechauns]

Gotta go.

Hopefully to find your sixth virtual cache?

[Pto]

Hopefully to find your sixth virtual cache?

 

^borderline insult/personal attack/rudeness/etc

Nice Moderating

[+StarBrand]

......I've proved that.

Wow.

 

Makes me feel glad that I win.

 

Yes my example was a poor example of a virtual. Aren't you glad I can't make anymore of those?

 

I win.

Edited June 6, 2006 by StarBrand

[Jeremy]

One of my favorite locationless caches. The photo link is great!

 

(oops. apparently the web site http.com goes to microsoft.

Edited June 6, 2006 by Jeremy

[+StarBrand]

One of my favorite locationless caches. The photo link is great!

[+The Leprechauns]

Hopefully to find your sixth virtual cache?

 

^borderline insult/personal attack/rudeness/etc

Nice Moderating

I wished the gentleman well in his travels. I like it when people leave their computer and go find geocaches (or waymarks).

 

This is not my moderator account. See the explanation below.

[+Cornerstone4]

One of my favorite locationless caches. The photo link is great!

 

Ok, you got me...

 

I tried the link 5 times before it dawned on me that the joke was on me...

 

[+VegasCacheHounds]

Okay, let me address this subject with what I feel:

 

Some Virtual caches were good, some were lame, same with Locationless caches. Either way, they caused problems, many problems, for the people who run this website (who, BTW, run it free of charge for those that don't wish to pay) so they decided to move them to a different website and restructure them in a way that works better (in my, and many others, opinion).

 

Now, there has been a couple of times that I've wished that Virtual caches still were allowed, but that has been pretty rare.

 

Cowboy X states that he thinks that geocaching as a whole suffers because cachers no longer have the option to place a Virtual cache that involves puzzles. While it is true that the option of a puzzle Virt is gone, the only major change is that now a chacer has to find a way to work an actual container into the end of the puzzle or adventure, a place where the intreped hunter can sign his/her name to mark the find. Doesn't sound like a negative impact to me. If a hider cannot deal with this two things come to mind: A.) They don't seem very creative to me, and I probably won't mind the lack of their Virtual, and B.) there are other websites that still allow Virtuals and Locationless caches.

Edited June 6, 2006 by VegasCacheHounds

[+tozainamboku]

One problem that new waymarkers have is that Waymarking is not just locationless + virtuals. It really is something different. Therefore it is not obvious how you can get the same, or at least a very similar, experience from Waymarking.

 

Most locationless were a little bit oddball and interesting and challenging to find. It's not very hard to find a McDonalds Restaurant or a historic marker. However there are some categories that have the look and feel of locationless. There is a whole section of Waymarking games that are much more like the locationless that required a special task be performed. Take some time to explore the Waymarking directory and you may find a few categories that you might want to try to create waymarks for. Just ignore the categories you are not interested in.

 

When it comes to visiting waymarks, it is true that for most categories, the experience will not be like a virtual cache. Only a few Waymarking categories have verification reuirements for a visit and for those that do, it is often just to post a picture. In addition, since you know from the category something about what you will find, you lose the suprise element that many virtual caches had. The Best Kept Secrets category was created to try to make a Waymarking experience that is close to that of the best virtual caches. A best kept secret will take to see something that most people don't know about. The waymark creators are encourage not to give away too much in their description so you can be suprised when you visit. Best kept secrets require that you find the answers to one or more verification questions when you visit the waymark.

 

Finally, if you try Waymarking, you may just find that you begin to view Waymarking as a separate activity from geocaching. Instead of just using it as a substitute for loactionless or virtuals, you might just discover a new interest. You may develop an interest in visiting historical markers or waterfalls. Or you might find it fun to record locations of payphones or benchmarks. With so many categories - and new ones appearing everyday - there is probably something for everyone. Some people have invented their own games - like finding McDonald's Restaurants that have something unusual about them or finding a waymark that can be listed in several different categories.

[+Quiggle]

One of my favorite locationless caches. The photo link is great!

 

One of my favorite locationless caches. The photo link is great!

 

Ok, you got me...

 

I tried the link 5 times before it dawned on me that the joke was on me...

 

 

There was a formatting error in his original post, which he later edited. Try this link.

[+briansnat]

...and how it has been hurt by Waymarking.

 

Especially urban geocachers.

 

It hasn't.

[+Bill & Tammy]

Finding and logging a virtual was much the same as logging a cache, sure sometimes you had to find some dates on a statue to verify it, but it felt like the game of geocaching. It was fun. With Waymarking I feel like I am working for some publishing company for vacation reviews or something. Have you seen some of the logging requirements (variables) at WMing, I mean geeesh? Here are the variables for WiFi hotspots:

 

Channel

Connection Type

DHCP IP's Given Out

Open FreeNet for Public Use

Pay Network

WEP (broke) Crypto

BSSID or MAC (0A:2C:EF:3D:25:1B)

SSID or Network Name

Station Name

Approximate Location

Noise Level in dB (40)

Probe Interval in Milliseconds (100)

Signal Strength in dB (57)

Signal to Noise Ratio in dB (17)

Altitude in Feet (450)

 

Good Lord, I should get paid to do this. Sorry, feels too much like work and not a game to me.

 

I still contend that WMIng is nothing more than a global coordinate "phonebook" and about as interesting as one.

Edited June 6, 2006 by Bill & Tammy

[+RichardMoore]

Good virtuals include puzzles and clues, multiple locations and tasks - waymarks do not.

 

Anyone can log a waymark - anyone, anywhere - the challenge of locationless hunts was to find a unique location.

Uh, excuse me...

I don't recall any of the virtual or locationless caches that I've logged containing puzzles or clues, or having multiple locations. The only tasks associated with them was the proof that you were there, for example answering a question or taking a picture.

The "hunt" for a locationless wasn't so much a hunt as a memory-matching game. You see something and you remember seeing a locationless cache page for that item, or you see a locationless cache page and remember where you saw that item.

So, by your definition, most of the virtuals and locationless caches weren't "good". So there's not that much to miss, is there?

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

I have found ways to enjoy Waymarking. Ive looked for outstanding things in each category. They are there, if you look. I was sad that virtuals couldnt be added for such a long time. I was sad too, that I never was able to post a locationless cache of my own. I got excited to see that they are at Waymarking. Maybe they dont have the traffic now, but they will eventually. In the meantime, Im enjoying it.

 

Porky Lights Up

 

Patsy Ann, Juneau's Official Greeter

 

Day of Infamy

 

Blue Sky Mausoleum

 

Ggantija Temples - Peace Pole on island of Gozo, Malta

 

FIRST - Announcement of the Secret of Life

 

Mt. St. Helens from Harry's Ridge

 

Museum of Bad Art

 

Even the "hated" MacDonalds category has some interesting ones. Read this one and see for yourself.

 

Would you like Bach with that?

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

If you really feel the need for a virtual on geocaching, perhaps you can incorporate a virtual with a real cache. For example, a multicache with the first coordinates leading you to a "virtual" site, and the second set of coordinates will depend on what you find at that first location. The second location can lead to a nice big cache of goodies. Unless Im wrong, those are still allowable that way.

[+Metaphor]

I wasn't a real fan of locationless (did two) or virtuals (did some). I usually did virtuals when I was out of town (or the country) and there wasn't any other way to mark the local fire hydrant. Some have been interesting -- trying to translate the information at the site into English, for instance, and some have been just plain ho-hum -- "What is the date of ____ on the marker?"

 

Now, I help to oversee the Maryland Historical Marker category in Waymarking, and I have to say I enjoy it as much, if not more, than virts or locationless. There aren't a lot of "good" caches (longer/ outdoorsy/ hike/kayak/ historical) left in my area, and Waymarking has filled that niche. I can add to my own category, start to look for others that have already been established (I recently contributed to "Rev War Vet Gravesites" and have a couple I want to submit to old train stations and Pictures of Then and Now categories), and fill a niche that was lacking, at my own pace. Now granted, I don't get a smiley for waymarks, but if that was what I was looking for as my primary objective, I would have been missing the point then, wouldn't I?

 

Virtuals and Locationless -- I don't miss them at all. They're just waymarks -- sans smileys...

 

Be creative in the way you look at them, create your own category, make the search yours...it'll be more interesting to you than the pokomon rat-race attitude of "gotta get 'em all..."

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Hopefully to find your sixth virtual cache?

 

^borderline insult/personal attack/rudeness/etc

Nice Moderating

I wished the gentleman well in his travels. I like it when people leave their computer and go find geocaches (or waymarks).

 

This is not my moderator account. See the explanation below.

 

I see moderator right there under your avatar. That is still what people will see regardless of what you have in your sig line.

[+Corp Of Discovery]

The cool thing about Waymarking is after someone finds that cool location first, others can log the location later.

 

I kinda liked that when I found a spot for an LC no one else could log it. So that part is a bit different, but based upon personal preferences.

 

I don't see that Waymarking has affected geocaching, urban or otherwise. I just can't seem to get worked up about it, but that doesn't make it bad. Others seem to like it quite a bit. I may end up loving too. Time will tell.

[+Bill & Tammy]

If you really feel the need for a virtual on geocaching, perhaps you can incorporate a virtual with a real cache. For example, a multicache with the first coordinates leading you to a "virtual" site, and the second set of coordinates will depend on what you find at that first location. The second location can lead to a nice big cache of goodies. Unless Im wrong, those are still allowable that way.

 

As I have stated before, one thing I liked about virtuals is that they opened up the game of caching a little bit more to those requiring mobility assistance. I am definately not saying that those who have special needs should be segregated to doing virtuals only but they were a way to find "caches" and enjoy the game in an albiet limited manner. In my area nearly none of the traditional ammo can type caches could be logged readily by a peron requiring a wheelchair or a scooter, but every virtual could. What good is it to somebody in a scooter that can find the first virtual stage of a cache and then find themselves unable to make it to the final "cache of goodies".

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

Well, if they cache with a friend, that can help. Mike and I cache together. There are times I cant reach a cache, or didnt realize I had to climb a barrier to get to a cache..and he will do that part. I still have fun doing what I can. I have a great time with my husband.

 

On the other hand, not every virtual is easy to access. Many urban micros are easy to access if you are handicapped. You just have to figure out how to read the pages and get to know the way people set up their cache hides.

[+Stunod]

The cool thing about Waymarking is after someone finds that cool location first, others can log the location later.

 

I kinda liked that when I found a spot for an LC no one else could log it. So that part is a bit different, but based upon personal preferences.

 

Now, once you create a waymark (within a catagory) no one else can mark it...they can only log it after you. You OWN that spot now

[+Harry Dolphin]

What a bunch of off-topic posts! The topic is not "Extol the Virtues of Whybotherpointing.com".

Geocaching has not been hurt by Waymarking. It was hurt by the decision to remove LC & VC. The variety has been diminished. Not my decision. I don't make the rules around here. Some of the LCs were far more challenging than most 'regular' caches. I miss them.

Saying that "You should go to the other place" is like saying "You should try the brussel sprouts rather than the Rocky Road Ice Cream". Nice place, I am sure. But it isn't here. Lots of other nice places to go. I'm fond of haiku pages, myself. But it's not geocaching. Terracaching sounds more interesting than that other place where all the bad ideas got banished. You puts your nickel down, and you takes your chances.

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

I like virtuals and locationless. But Im realistic. They are not coming back to this site as they used to be. So Ive learned to make the best of it. Waymarking is fun, if you choose to let it be fun. There are many reasons why virtuals and locationless caches are gone. I can think of some reasons that I agree are good ones. I can also think of poor reasons. Regardless, this is the choice of this site, based on what they feel are good reasons. Why not try and make Waymarking work? At least it gives us the virtuals and locationless caches back, even if they do have another name.

[+Miragee]

What a bunch of off-topic posts! The topic is not "Extol the Virtues of Whybotherpointing.com".

Geocaching has not been hurt by Waymarking. It was hurt by the decision to remove LC & VC. The variety has been diminished. Not my decision. I don't make the rules around here. Some of the LCs were far more challenging than most 'regular' caches. I miss them.

Saying that "You should go to the other place" is like saying "You should try the brussel sprouts rather than the Rocky Road Ice Cream". Nice place, I am sure. But it isn't here. Lots of other nice places to go. I'm fond of haiku pages, myself. But it's not geocaching. Terracaching sounds more interesting than that other place where all the bad ideas got banished. You puts your nickel down, and you takes your chances.

I agree. The recent mentions of Waymarking have sent me over there a few times in the past two days. So far, the things I have searched for here, in the San Diego area, including WiFi HotSpots, have resulted in "No search results in ten miles."

 

On Terracaching.com I actually get results from my zipcode.

[+briansnat]

What a bunch of off-topic posts! The topic is not "Extol the Virtues of Whybotherpointing.com".

Geocaching has not been hurt by Waymarking. It was hurt by the decision to remove LC & VC. The variety has been diminished. Not my decision.

 

VCs have not been removed. There are still thousands listed for people to enjoy. Anyone who joined this site after around Feb of 04 really shouldn't see any difference as far as VCs go because they were effectively not being published after that date anyways. Well there were some, but it was very, very rare.

 

LCs are gone, but they never really belonged here. They weren't geocaching in any sense of the word.

[+ReadyOrNot]

What a bunch of off-topic posts! The topic is not "Extol the Virtues of Whybotherpointing.com".

Geocaching has not been hurt by Waymarking. It was hurt by the decision to remove LC & VC. The variety has been diminished. Not my decision. I don't make the rules around here. Some of the LCs were far more challenging than most 'regular' caches. I miss them.

Saying that "You should go to the other place" is like saying "You should try the brussel sprouts rather than the Rocky Road Ice Cream". Nice place, I am sure. But it isn't here. Lots of other nice places to go. I'm fond of haiku pages, myself. But it's not geocaching. Terracaching sounds more interesting than that other place where all the bad ideas got banished. You puts your nickel down, and you takes your chances.

 

I think the problem was that locationless and virtuals aren't really geocaches. They probably shouldn't have been included from the beginning, but you live and learn.. Now they have their rightful home on Waymarking.com. Terracaching has always sounded interesting to me, but there are a whopping 2 terracaches within a 100 mile radius of my house (if that doesn't raise a red flag that something is wrong over there, I don't know what does). Some would have you believe there is a mass exodus to TerraCaching, but they must not be from the Northwest