Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Xopster

Webcam Caches Removed from GC.COM THREAD NUMBER 2

Recommended Posts

As much as I too would love to see WebCams come back, though I have since Grown to enjoy Waymarking as well.

 

I am not sure why a second site bothers people, adapting is what we humans do best!

 

Why measue success with smileys? Go out and enjoy what you know makes you happy weather it is on Geocaching, Waymarking or anything else for that matter.

Share this post


Link to post

I'll take them one at a time.

Two comments. The difficulty the reviewers had was in large part due to the extra rules created by TPTB to be enforced by the reviewers.
These are caches that use existing web cameras placed by individuals or agencies that monitor various areas like parks or road conditions. The idea is to get yourself in front of the camera to log your visit. The camera must provide a photo detailed enough to identify the cacher. The cameras must update at reliable intervals so geocachers can log their visit.
That is from the old guidelines for webcams, and there were only two guideline criteria points to meet. Reliability is what it is, so the only other thing that could cause an issue is that the geocacher had to be identifiable in the photo. Some people submitted webcams where the people looked like dust specks on the camera lens (the reason for my comment). Yet, they would fight tooth and nail over it. Been there, done that. I should have made a CafePress t-shirt. <_< Whether someone was identifiable was the subjective part and I am glad we don't have to fight over it anymore. When the OP contacted me about webcams, that was the question.

 

As for Waymarking what you say may be true for webcams. It's certainly not true for other sections where people are debating things like the minimum (and subjective) quality of a submission. You just have a larger pool of peopole making those subjective decisions. Perhaps visits themselves are not subject to any approval at all?
Off topic, but, you need to take that up with the Waymarking owners. It is what it is. It is the beauty of Waymarking. Category owners can run their category the way the want. Back to my old natural arch category, for example, we decided to include lava tubes if they created arches. Deciding what is an arch or a tube is our business and does not involve Groundspeak. To me and many other Waymarking category managers, that is a beautiful thing.

Share this post


Link to post

I like being taken to places, it doesnt matter to me if I actually write my name on a piece of paper. Going down a unknown road and seeing something new is what I enjoy.

Wow, then it sounds like Waymarking is exactly for you! I'm sorry that you feel that going to another website to do that feels like too much work for you. Personally, I like having one site set apart for just waypoints and nothing else. <_<

Share this post


Link to post

Why does the "go to another site" issue always come up? These same people don't seem to mind going to another site when they come to these forums. The forums are another site completely different hardware and software and yet its ok to come here. A link is a link. I don't understand the argument.

Share this post


Link to post

....Reliability is what it is, so the only other thing that could cause an issue is that the geocacher had to be identifiable in the photo. Some people submitted webcams where the people looked like dust specks on the camera lens (the reason for my comment). Yet, they would fight tooth and nail over it....

 

The issue isn't from people getting themlves in the webcam, but this sites insistance that it had to be a mug shot. I could easily have parked my rig in the view, built a large X, made a hello banner, used my million candle power flashlight and created a daytime star... That your boss said "nothing doing it's got to be a clearly identefiable view of the cacher" created the heartache.

Share this post


Link to post

Why does the "go to another site" issue always come up? ...

 

Because it's an issue. The people who refust to use other cache sites seem to be the first in line to say "go to the Waymarking site". Oddly enough the people who do use other cache sites seem to be the ones saying "we want it all on this site". Strange but true.

Share this post


Link to post
....Reliability is what it is, so the only other thing that could cause an issue is that the geocacher had to be identifiable in the photo. Some people submitted webcams where the people looked like dust specks on the camera lens (the reason for my comment). Yet, they would fight tooth and nail over it....

 

The issue isn't from people getting themlves in the webcam, but this sites insistance that it had to be a mug shot. I could easily have parked my rig in the view, built a large X, made a hello banner, used my million candle power flashlight and created a daytime star... That your boss said "nothing doing it's got to be a clearly identefiable view of the cacher" created the heartache.

I respect that this is his site. I certainly hope people don't start dictating to me what I put on my web sites. One of my many web sites has a lot of political stuff on it. I don't care what you think about what I have on it, I'm not changing it. Period. I think Jeremy said the same thing about webcams. They are not coming back. I respect that.

 

Way back between now and 1891 <_< , find counts were removed from the site. I remember that it did not last long (like, as in days) because there was a huge negative reaction. Huge. Instant. Huge. The users spoke in volumes wanting them back. They came back quickly. Why? A great number of users wanted them back. Lots. Jeremy listened.

 

I gotta' tell you... I'm not seeing a huge groundswell of concern here. I see a few people and that's it. That is probably why Groundspeak isn't reacting. I mean, how long have they been gone and this topic is just showing up? (scratches head and goes hmmmm)

Share this post


Link to post

Why does the "go to another site" issue always come up?

 

I think "go to another site" is code for the following:

  1. When everything was on one site, you could get a PQ, or even just download the LOC from the search page, with traditional caches, webcams, and virts all in one file. Then when you went geocaching you would have all these. Right now there are no PQs on Waymarking.com and you need to do manually combine the Waymarking LOC with the LOC or GPX of the caches in the same area to be able to load it all on your GPS.
  2. When everything was on one site and you found a virtual or a webcam, it counted in your statistics.

Share this post


Link to post

But it has never been one site. The forums are another site. They have to go to another site to complain about going to another site.

Share this post


Link to post

glad I finally got my webcam cache in before the 'lock'

 

kind of like my locationless ones too.

 

Better hurry off and find one of those Ape caches...

Share this post


Link to post

As much as I too would love to see WebCams come back, though I have since Grown to enjoy Waymarking as well.

 

As with everyone who "enjoys" Waymarking, I see you have 150+ placed, and almost every one of them never visited. Not to single you out or anything, but that's all I see, everywhere. It's just a placers game, people who enjoy writing them up (and doing a dadgum good job too). But are the visitors ever going to come? I don't see it. How long is this going to go on? 1,000,000 Waymarks placed, with 975,000 never visited? <_<

Edited by TheWhiteUrkel

Share this post


Link to post

glad I finally got my webcam cache in before the 'lock'

 

kind of like my locationless ones too.

 

Better hurry off and find one of those Ape caches...

Webcams have not been "locked". They are just not accepting any new ones. You are free to run out and grab any of the grandfathered webcams that are still out there. <_<

Share this post


Link to post

But it has never been one site. The forums are another site. They have to go to another site to complain about going to another site.

 

How can the forums be compared to gc.com? 2 entirely different purposes. One is to talk...thats it. One is to gather information, coords, ect for caching. Now theres 4 sites when you add in wm.com and its forums.

Jee, lets spend more time online looking for coords and inputing them to the gps and less time outside. Good plan.rolleye0005.gif

Share this post


Link to post

But it has never been one site. The forums are another site. They have to go to another site to complain about going to another site.

 

How can the forums be compared to gc.com? 2 entirely different purposes. One is to talk...thats it. One is to gather information, coords, ect for caching. Now theres 4 sites when you add in wm.com and its forums.

Jee, lets spend more time online looking for coords and inputing them to the gps and less time outside. Good plan.rolleye0005.gif

How can gc.com be compared to Waymarking.com? 2 different things. One is for finding (mostly) physical caches. The other is for going out and finding categories to waymark, or waymarks to visit. A treasure hunt vs. a scavenger hunt. :D

 

:laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

But it has never been one site. The forums are another site. They have to go to another site to complain about going to another site.

 

How can the forums be compared to gc.com? 2 entirely different purposes. One is to talk...thats it. One is to gather information, coords, ect for caching. Now theres 4 sites when you add in wm.com and its forums.

Jee, lets spend more time online looking for coords and inputing them to the gps and less time outside. Good plan.rolleye0005.gif

How can gc.com be compared to Waymarking.com? 2 different things. One is for finding (mostly) physical caches. The other is for going out and finding categories to waymark, or waymarks to visit. A treasure hunt vs. a scavenger hunt. :D

 

:laughing:

 

Hmmmm....

 

Geocaching.com- you look up coordinates to a place where you go to find something.

Waymarking.com- you look up coordinates to a place where you go to find something.

 

Yeah, BIG difference there.

 

I could go on with the list (navicache/terracaching/waypoint/confluence project etc.) of course, but why bother? They all are basically the same idea- just different in execution. It was nice to have a wide variety in one place. As grandfathered ones get archived (and I think you'll see them going quicker and quicker as time goes on, for various reasons) that variety will disappear. And that is not a good thing in my opinion. :D

Share this post


Link to post

....I respect that this is his site. I certainly hope people don't start dictating to me what I put on my web sites. One of my many web sites has a lot of political stuff on it. I don't care what you think about what I have on it, I'm not changing it. Period. I think Jeremy said the same thing about webcams. They are not coming back. I respect that. ...

 

I understand what you are saying, but we are not exactly communicating. My point remains that as an approver you had things dictated to you that made your job tougher. We either agree or don't agree on that point. You can respect that it's his site and that's fine. It doesn't mean your job was easier as a result. WOW is the best example.

 

On Webcams and Locationless this site went an extra step and actully detailed in part what cache owners were required to accept as finds which also required that they specify things in the listing and that bled into what listings were even acceptable. It was much more invasive than a traditional cache.

 

As for your comments on the concern level. Proof is in the pudding so to speak. If the waymark webcams are logged at a rate (adjusted for geocaching growth etc.) that is greater than they were on gc.com then they are a raging success and that's the end of that. If not, well, there's your proof which still hits the "this is his site wall" but at least there is better information available.

Share this post


Link to post

But it has never been one site. The forums are another site. They have to go to another site to complain about going to another site.

 

How can the forums be compared to gc.com? 2 entirely different purposes. One is to talk...thats it. One is to gather information, coords, ect for caching. Now theres 4 sites when you add in wm.com and its forums.

Jee, lets spend more time online looking for coords and inputing them to the gps and less time outside. Good plan.rolleye0005.gif

How can gc.com be compared to Waymarking.com? 2 different things. One is for finding (mostly) physical caches. The other is for going out and finding categories to waymark, or waymarks to visit. A treasure hunt vs. a scavenger hunt. :D

 

:D

 

Hmmmm....

 

Geocaching.com- you look up coordinates to a place where you go to find something.

Waymarking.com- you look up coordinates to a place where you go to find something.

 

Yeah, BIG difference there.

 

People can't have it both ways, you know. Everyone keeps saying that right now most people are using Waymarking like locationless caching. That is not looking up coordinates to a place online and then going to find it. That's finding an object listed, going out and finding one near you and recording the coords online. :laughing:

Edited by Ambrosia

Share this post


Link to post

 

Hmmmm....

 

Geocaching.com- you look up coordinates to a place where you go to find something.

Waymarking.com- you look up coordinates to a place where you go to find something.

 

Yeah, BIG difference there.

 

I could go on with the list (navicache/terracaching/waypoint/confluence project etc.) of course, but why bother? They all are basically the same idea- just different in execution. It was nice to have a wide variety in one place. As grandfathered ones get archived (and I think you'll see them going quicker and quicker as time goes on, for various reasons) that variety will disappear. And that is not a good thing in my opinion. :laughing:

 

It's a bit simplistic to view geocaching.com as "you look up coordinates to a place where you go to find something." Originally, geocaching.com was a place where people who hid containers with a log and usually with trade items would post the coordinates and where people who wanted to find these containers could look up there coordinates. In the early years, Jeremy was willing to experiment and expanded the site (and the definition of geocache) to include other things. Some geocachers embraced the new options while others complained they did not reflect the original intent of geocaching. Locationless caches were for finding things and then posting the coordinates. Virtual had you "find" some object that was already there (and usually not hidden). Webcams gave you coordinates to stand at while a friend captured your picture on the internet (what was there to find?). People began submitting locationless and virtual cache that were frankly "lame". This was because it was easy to make up a locationless cache or to make every sign or historic marker into a virtual. In order to stem the tide of lame locationless and virtuals there was a moratorium on new locationless caches and tough "wowness" requirements for new virtuals. Webcams had rules that you had to be recognizble in the picture in order to limit the number that might be submitted and to server as a verification that person claiming a "find" really did go to the coordinates to get their picture taken.

 

In looking for a solution for locationless caches, which many did not view as real caches, TPTB came up with some concepts that developed into Waymarking. Waymarking is truly a place where "you look up the coordinates to a place where you go to visit". What you do when you visit the place depends on the category and perhaps additional requirements of the particular waymark. Thus webcams and virutal caches fit the Waymarking model much better than they fit to geocaching. The Waymarking categories also serve as a replacement for locationless cache. While some categories are pretty mundane and would make lame locationless caches, other categories can be quite interesting and challeging to find new waymarks.

 

Change is often hard to accept. Geocaching continues to change and some of the new games that were added to geocaching are now moving to Waymarking where they may be a better fit. By taking geocaching back to its roots, the geocaching.com site can concentrate on the traditional aspects of geocaching and better server the people who want to hide or find containers. Waymarking then becomes the site for developing a new set of games and other uses for a database of locations.

Share this post


Link to post

....I respect that this is his site. I certainly hope people don't start dictating to me what I put on my web sites. One of my many web sites has a lot of political stuff on it. I don't care what you think about what I have on it, I'm not changing it. Period. I think Jeremy said the same thing about webcams. They are not coming back. I respect that. ...

 

I understand what you are saying, but we are not exactly communicating. My point remains that as an approver you had things dictated to you that made your job tougher. We either agree or don't agree on that point. You can respect that it's his site and that's fine. It doesn't mean your job was easier as a result. WOW is the best example.

 

On Webcams and Locationless this site went an extra step and actully detailed in part what cache owners were required to accept as finds which also required that they specify things in the listing and that bled into what listings were even acceptable. It was much more invasive than a traditional cache.

 

As for your comments on the concern level. Proof is in the pudding so to speak. If the waymark webcams are logged at a rate (adjusted for geocaching growth etc.) that is greater than they were on gc.com then they are a raging success and that's the end of that. If not, well, there's your proof which still hits the "this is his site wall" but at least there is better information available.

OK, once again, let's actually get the facts here.

Logging a webcam cache find requires compliance with the requirements stated by the poster, including providing the required photo as the owner has requested or following the example provided.

It was one sentence! Holy cow, how in the world is that *MORE* restrictive than regular caches?????? :laughing:

 

The facts, which I have quoted in both of your questions with one regarding submission of a webcam and one regarding logging a find, do not support your argument in the least! I really like you RK, but you are killing yourself by not going back to the facts. That is not like you. Bring facts man, bring facts!

Share this post


Link to post

But it has never been one site. The forums are another site. They have to go to another site to complain about going to another site.

 

How can the forums be compared to gc.com? 2 entirely different purposes. One is to talk...thats it. One is to gather information, coords, ect for caching. Now theres 4 sites when you add in wm.com and its forums.

Jee, lets spend more time online looking for coords and inputing them to the gps and less time outside. Good plan.rolleye0005.gif

How can gc.com be compared to Waymarking.com? 2 different things. One is for finding (mostly) physical caches. The other is for going out and finding categories to waymark, or waymarks to visit. A treasure hunt vs. a scavenger hunt. :D

 

:D

 

Hmmmm....

 

Geocaching.com- you look up coordinates to a place where you go to find something.

Waymarking.com- you look up coordinates to a place where you go to find something.

 

Yeah, BIG difference there.

 

People can't have it both ways, you know. Everyone keeps saying that right now most people are using Waymarking like locationless caching. That is not looking up coordinates to a place online and then going to find it. That's finding an object listed, going out and finding one near you and recording the coords online. :laughing:

 

So basically what you have is a lot of hiders but not so many finders. :D

If those same places were on Geocaching.com they might be visited a little more often. :D

Share this post


Link to post
As for your comments on the concern level. Proof is in the pudding so to speak. If the waymark webcams are logged at a rate (adjusted for geocaching growth etc.) that is greater than they were on gc.com then they are a raging success and that's the end of that. If not, well, there's your proof which still hits the "this is his site wall" but at least there is better information available.

I want to take this separate. You are right. They are not that popular. They were not that popular here and they are not that popular there. Of the three GC listed ones I have done, two get maybe a find a month on average. Only one, the Bourbon Street Cam, is fairly popular. This supports my argument that there is not huge outcry regarding them being moved to Waymarking. Most people can take them or leave them.

Share this post


Link to post

 

I know you were being sarcastic here, but that is part of the real issue. I almost guarantee you that if waymarks became a new icon in your GC.com stats and added to your find count, WM.com would explode in popularity overnight.

 

And if the separate icon for Webcam caches (grandfathered) disappeared from Geocaching.com and the number just rolled into one of the other categories, fewer people would complain about them not being on geocaching.com anymore. Ditto for the other cache types that have moved. And there's money involved with Earthcaches...that's (my opinion as to) why they moved back.

Share this post


Link to post

I like being taken to places, it doesnt matter to me if I actually write my name on a piece of paper. Going down a unknown road and seeing something new is what I enjoy.

 

Perhaps you should make Waymarking.com the one site you use!

Share this post


Link to post
So basically what you have is a lot of hiders but not so many finders. :laughing:

If those same places were on Geocaching.com they might be visited a little more often. :D

You can't compare stats on the less-than-a-year-old Waymarking vs. the six-year-old geocaching. Geocaching was pretty slow in the first year, too. The first cache I found, I was FTF after it sat lonely for almost two weeks! Waymarking, just like geocaching, will take a while to catch on. Did we see mega-cachers with thousands of finds before Pocket Queries? No, PQs enabled that. But geocaching didn't have PQs right at first. The LOC files on Waymarking is a start. Eventually we'll have full PQs (or whatever they get called) and then Waymarking will be primed to take off.

Share this post


Link to post
It's a bit simplistic to view geocaching.com as "you look up coordinates to a place where you go to find something."

 

Not really. That's pretty much it. For anything further read my 3rd tag line.

 

Originally, geocaching.com was a place where people who hid containers with a log and usually with trade items would post the coordinates and where people who wanted to find these containers could look up there coordinates. In the early years, Jeremy was willing to experiment and expanded the site (and the definition of geocache) to include other things. Some geocachers embraced the new options while others complained they did not reflect the original intent of geocaching. Locationless caches were for finding things and then posting the coordinates. Virtual had you "find" some object that was already there (and usually not hidden). Webcams gave you coordinates to stand at while a friend captured your picture on the internet (what was there to find?). People began submitting locationless and virtual cache that were frankly "lame". This was because it was easy to make up a locationless cache or to make every sign or historic marker into a virtual. In order to stem the tide of lame locationless and virtuals there was a moratorium on new locationless caches and tough "wowness" requirements for new virtuals. Webcams had rules that you had to be recognizble in the picture in order to limit the number that might be submitted and to server as a verification that person claiming a "find" really did go to the coordinates to get their picture taken.

 

You know, I've been in the forums a bit and I don't recall as many threads that were about the proliferation of 'lame' virts & LCs as I do now about 'lame' micros. I guess micros are next...

 

In looking for a solution for locationless caches, which many did not view as real caches, TPTB came up with some concepts that developed into Waymarking. Waymarking is truly a place where "you look up the coordinates to a place where you go to visit". What you do when you visit the place depends on the category and perhaps additional requirements of the particular waymark. Thus webcams and virutal caches fit the Waymarking model much better than they fit to geocaching. The Waymarking categories also serve as a replacement for locationless cache. While some categories are pretty mundane and would make lame locationless caches, other categories can be quite interesting and challeging to find new waymarks.

 

Change is often hard to accept. Geocaching continues to change and some of the new games that were added to geocaching are now moving to Waymarking where they may be a better fit. By taking geocaching back to its roots, the geocaching.com site can concentrate on the traditional aspects of geocaching and better server the people who want to hide or find containers. Waymarking then becomes the site for developing a new set of games and other uses for a database of locations.

 

Those games fit pretty well right where they were. They fit on Navicache and Terracaching too. But there's not a groundswell going to those sites anymore than they are going to Waymarking. Geocaching.com is, for the rank & file cacher, familiar and comfortable. People like that and tend to stay with places that have those characteristics. I think that's why you don't see a huge flow to any other site.

Share this post


Link to post

As much as I too would love to see WebCams come back, though I have since Grown to enjoy Waymarking as well.

 

As with everyone who "enjoys" Waymarking, I see you have 150+ placed, and almost every one of them never visited. Not to single you out or anything, but that's all I see, everywhere. It's just a placers game, people who enjoy writing them up (and doing a dadgum good job too). But are the visitors ever going to come? I don't see it. How long is this going to go on? 1,000,000 Waymarks placed, with 975,000 never visited? :anibad:

 

I have 29 waymarks that were not "founded" by me loaded into my GPSr. I -tried- to visit one last night, but, being in a downtown environment, in the dark, with traffic, and parking issues, I couldn't. But I have vaction coming up...so those of you with waymarks in my area...I might be visiting some soon.

 

And, FWIW, I have more "Visits" than "Waymarks" on my Stats Image....not many, but I'm trying!

Share this post


Link to post
So basically what you have is a lot of hiders but not so many finders. :laughing:

If those same places were on Geocaching.com they might be visited a little more often. :D

You can't compare stats on the less-than-a-year-old Waymarking vs. the six-year-old geocaching. Geocaching was pretty slow in the first year, too. The first cache I found, I was FTF after it sat lonely for almost two weeks! Waymarking, just like geocaching, will take a while to catch on. Did we see mega-cachers with thousands of finds before Pocket Queries? No, PQs enabled that. But geocaching didn't have PQs right at first. The LOC files on Waymarking is a start. Eventually we'll have full PQs (or whatever they get called) and then Waymarking will be primed to take off.

 

1st off: see my first post in this thread.

 

2nd: But Waymarking.com has a built in user base that Geocaching.com didn't- namely the thousands of Geocaching.com users. That, one would think, should give it a pretty big boost. But it hasn't happened- yet. PQs will help of course but it will be interesting to see how much. It would be nice to see side by side stats for the first year of both sites. Number hidden and number found for Geocaching.com and the equivelents on Waymarking.com. I think the ratio of finds/hidden would be really telling, one way or the other.

Share this post


Link to post

....OK, once again, let's actually get the facts here.

Logging a webcam cache find requires compliance with the requirements stated by the poster, including providing the required photo as the owner has requested or following the example provided.

It was one sentence! Holy cow, how in the world is that *MORE* restrictive than regular caches?????? :laughing:

 

The facts, which I have quoted in both of your questions with one regarding submission of a webcam and one regarding logging a find, do not support your argument in the least! I really like you RK, but you are killing yourself by not going back to the facts. That is not like you. Bring facts man, bring facts!

 

 

Fact: To have a webcam approved you had to have the ability to see the cacher and recogize them.

 

I had to show my webcam could do that to get it approved. You could be right that I could have said (once approved) "you don't actually have to appear on the photo you can leave your name in the snow, or park your hummer on the steps". However given the requiremnt that I prove cachers be recognizable to get the listing I didnt' even go there.

 

You make a fair point. Would my webcam have been approved if I said "please do not appear on the photo, I want to see your creative way to make your find stand out in the photo" on the listing? Truth be told I'd of rather done that than had the requirment that I did perhaps entirly through my ignorance on this guideline.

Share this post


Link to post

....It's a bit simplistic to view geocaching.com as "you look up coordinates to a place where you go to find something."...

 

Geocaching has two variations of coordinates.

 

Go find something at the coordinate and Go find something and report it's coordinate. I've got a list of about 30 or so cache types based around these concepts. There are few people who would, or even could enjoy all the variations let alone the ways you can implement them.

 

I think the point COD was making wasn't that it's that simple, but that even though some people try to say it's that simple it's not. There is more to it than the basic premis of "go there and find it".

 

Maybe you both agreed....

 

Edit: Reading COD's follow ups...looks like I'm wrong.

Edited by Renegade Knight

Share this post


Link to post

As much as I too would love to see WebCams come back, though I have since Grown to enjoy Waymarking as well.

 

As with everyone who "enjoys" Waymarking, I see you have 150+ placed, and almost every one of them never visited. Not to single you out or anything, but that's all I see, everywhere. It's just a placers game, people who enjoy writing them up (and doing a dadgum good job too). But are the visitors ever going to come? I don't see it. How long is this going to go on? 1,000,000 Waymarks placed, with 975,000 never visited? :D

 

I have 29 waymarks that were not "founded" by me loaded into my GPSr. I -tried- to visit one last night, but, being in a downtown environment, in the dark, with traffic, and parking issues, I couldn't. But I have vaction coming up...so those of you with waymarks in my area...I might be visiting some soon.

 

And, FWIW, I have more "Visits" than "Waymarks" on my Stats Image....not many, but I'm trying!

 

Oh, sorry, I see they have a relatively new term over there, "founded".

 

So it's not a "placers" only game, it's a "founders" only game. :laughing:

 

Seriously. Look at any city of 100,000 or so or more in the U.S. or Canada. In almost every case, you'll see one person who has waymarked hundreds of things, with almost no one else having waymarked anything in town, and almost no one having visited any of those hundreds of waymarks.

 

Good job on having more visits than waymarks though. :D Me too I suppose, but most are from being with the "one guy who waymarks everything in my city" while out caching with him.

Edited by TheWhiteUrkel

Share this post


Link to post
So basically what you have is a lot of hiders but not so many finders. :laughing:

If those same places were on Geocaching.com they might be visited a little more often. :D

You can't compare stats on the less-than-a-year-old Waymarking vs. the six-year-old geocaching. Geocaching was pretty slow in the first year, too. The first cache I found, I was FTF after it sat lonely for almost two weeks! Waymarking, just like geocaching, will take a while to catch on. Did we see mega-cachers with thousands of finds before Pocket Queries? No, PQs enabled that. But geocaching didn't have PQs right at first. The LOC files on Waymarking is a start. Eventually we'll have full PQs (or whatever they get called) and then Waymarking will be primed to take off.

 

I disagree. Waymarking is well over 1 year old. The oldest Waymark I could see on a quick looky of my local area was mid-August 2005, but I'll guess the site was up and running a few months before that.

 

I agree there is no comparison between the growth of the websites. Because you had plenty of people to find those early geocaches, and very few caches around. There weren't 30,000 Geocaches placed mainly by a few dozen people, with no one visiting them (my impression of Waymarking :D )

 

It's been about a year and a half. I believe Waymarking will never catch on and take off. Geocaching.com, on the other hand, was well positioned for explosive growth in early 2002, a year and a half after it's creation; and anyone could have predicted it. :D

Share this post


Link to post

....It's a bit simplistic to view geocaching.com as "you look up coordinates to a place where you go to find something."...

 

Geocaching has two variations of coordinates.

 

Go find something at the coordinate and Go find something and report it's coordinate. I've got a list of about 30 or so cache types based around these concepts. There are few people who would, or even could enjoy all the variations let alone the ways you can implement them.

 

I think the point COD was making wasn't that it's that simple, but that even though some people try to say it's that simple it's not. There is more to it than the basic premis of "go there and find it".

 

Maybe you both agreed....

 

Edit: Reading COD's follow ups...looks like I'm wrong.

 

Not really wrong. At it's most basic that is pretty much it- 'go here, find this'. Everything else is just a variation or enhancement of that concept. This hobby isn't rocket science no matter how much people want to BS things up. In short- the concept is simple, the implementation as far as websites and variations of that concept are of course not that simple. I happen to like the variations. I also like having one place to enjoy all the variations. I suspect others do too.

Share this post


Link to post

I have an idea lets start a forum catagory for beating dead horses and this can be the first topic. Webcam caches where cool, sorta depending on where they were. But they are gone from this site just the same as VIRTS and locationless. you people fail to realize that those catagories ate up alot of bandwith that clogs up the servers and causes that irritating server too busy message we get. Then there are hundreds of posts about the same old stuff over and over again. let it alone they are gone from here, and it has been made clear they are not returning so stop whining like little girls and move on, or start your own caching site and you list anything you want. noone is breaking your arm to pay for a membership to this site, if you don't like the menu, dine somewhere else. Would you go to a mexican restraunt and whine because they did not have lasagna? I doubt it. I think the bandwith thing I said above should be adaquete explanation, and no I do not work for Groundspeak, I run, host and maintain numerous websites and YOU probably have no idea of the amount of work that goesa into it. the more detail oriented the site the more chance for something to go wrong and people like you to cry about it. GO START YOUR OWN SITE with one stop shopping, then come back here in 2 years after you have 100,000 members and let's see your opnion.

 

<edited by moderator, please don't make the moderators cranky>

Edited by mtn-man

Share this post


Link to post

.... you people fail to realize that those catagories ate up alot of bandwith that clogs up the servers and causes that irritating server too busy message we get....

 

I suspect (and I only played a programmer on TV) that they could have solved the problem in several different ways. Bandwidth on GC, bandwidth on WM is still bandwidth. Different servers working with different parts of the larger database would likely have worked as well and it would all at least appear to be under the same roof.

 

Now to start that dead horse thread.

Share this post


Link to post

.... you people fail to realize that those catagories ate up alot of bandwith that clogs up the servers and causes that irritating server too busy message we get....

 

But are we just talking about webcam caches here? I'd agree with many of the locationless being bandwidth killers, big time. :laughing:

 

I suspect (and I only played a programmer on TV) that they could have solved the problem in several different ways. Bandwidth on GC, bandwidth on WM is still bandwidth. Different servers working with different parts of the larger database would likely have worked as well and it would all at least appear to be under the same roof.

 

Now to start that dead horse thread.

 

Well, there is certainly a lot of bandwidth and resources being used for Waymarking. Not that I know it and GC are interconnected at this time (I too only played programmer on TV :D ).

Share this post


Link to post
But are we just talking about webcam caches here?

Um, suppose to, yes. :laughing:

 

((in Monty Python voice) Hint hint, nudge nudge, say no more say no more)

Share this post


Link to post

Would you go to a mexican restraunt and whine because they did not have lasagna? I doubt it.

 

Maybe not, but once, I went to Taco Bell and complained that they didn't have hamburgers...

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

×
×
  • Create New...