Waypoints

[Fiona Eliza & Florence]

I am trying to set up my first cache. I have submitted to required form and now am being asked to mark my waypoints. It seems to me that I am repeating the info I have put on the cache page but adding a code name to the points. It is a multicache (2 parts) and I have already put the co-ordinates in for the final cache for the reviewer to see. Have I missed the point of this? Do I have to do the wayponts?

[+housefamily]

I am trying to set up my first cache. I have submitted to required form and now am being asked to mark my waypoints. It seems to me that I am repeating the info I have put on the cache page but adding a code name to the points. It is a multicache (2 parts) and I have already put the co-ordinates in for the final cache for the reviewer to see. Have I missed the point of this? Do I have to do the wayponts?

 

I'm afraid so. It's part of a master plan (muhaha) to put all co-ordinates described in a cache page into some sort of recognised form.

Adding them as waypoints means that when you download the cache into a program such as GSAK you can find the waypoints (parking coordinates etc) easily.

The reviewers have only requested this recently (in the last year or so), so older caches may not have additional waypoints described.

I'm not always sure of the benefit, but I can see it'd be handy in some cases, and it's not that much hassle!

 

Edit: by the way - I'm happy to be corrected by more 'experienced' cachers!

Edited August 4, 2006 by housefamily

[+rutson]

/me suspects it'd've been quicker to add two additional waypoints than ask the question

[Fiona Eliza & Florence]

Now it is saying "the coordinates cannot match the parent listing"....what?

[+MarcoXono]

I'm not always sure of the benefit,

The reviewers need to be able to check each waypoint of a new cache against each waypoint of any existing caches nearby (to check they're not within 0.1 miles).

If entered as additional waypoints, I suspect they have tools to check proximity automatically.

If not, they would need to trawl through the cache description and reviewer note before checking each waypoint. With maybe 150-200 Multi/Unknown caches submitted per month (in this country), I wouldn't wish this on anyone!

 

Now it is saying "the coordinates cannot match the parent listing"....what?

An Additional Waypoint cannot be the same as the published cache coordinates.

(see THIS THREAD)

 

Edit to add thread link.

Edited August 4, 2006 by MarcoXono

[+housefamily]

I'm happy to be corrected by more 'experienced' cachers!

 

As expected...

That sounds entirely reasonable. The system does seem slightly cumbersome though, with the whole prefix and code thing - not exactly intuitive!

 

I was right - it was only January. See this post by Lactodorum which might answer some questions.

Edited August 4, 2006 by housefamily

[Fiona Eliza & Florence]

Thank you. I have done it now.

 

"An Additional Waypoint cannot be the same as the published cache coordinates.

(see THIS THREAD)"

This was very helpful

 

"/me suspects it'd've been quicker to add two additional waypoints than ask the question "

This wasn't!

 

[+Jango & Boba Fett]

Having got used to adding the waypoints I now really like it. For instance you can keep notes about the clues etcetera with the hidden waypoints which saves a lot of time searching through old notebooks when you get a query from someone who dnf'd.

 

After all we can’t expert our three reviewers to be dealing with the deluge of caches we have all been submitting recently if they have to do all the checking of multi stages and puzzle cache final locations by hand.

 

Now where is that bag of micros I was just off to scatter around the city.