Have we missed the locationless caches?

[+Gralorn]

Have you missed them at all? Quite often we will come across something such as a round house, water wheel. Hippie VW and say, "typical, at last see one of these and no longer locationless caches to be had". It was the variety of things that people came across, Dovecotes, Poets graves and such like that made it fun with their photographs..................so are they missed?

[+Birdman-of-liskatraz]

Yep - I have an unclaimed cheese factory to claim! But I guess it's called Waymarking now...

[alistair_uk]

Personally I have come across a few things and thought that I would have logged, but as someone who did not do that many anyway I don't think it is fair to say that I have missed them.

 

moving slightly off topic I would like to see some more webcams allowed because I have found them fun, and I think there are some places that would benefit from a virtual when a physical is not practical.

 

My vote would be, if there was a vote, to bring back webcams, allow virtuals but have them moderated in the same was as earth caches, and I am totally ambivalent about locationless.

[+Write and Mane]

Yes

[+mongoose39uk]

Yes, didn't do them often but always nice to have something different.

[+The Lavender Hill Mob]

locationless caches

Sounds like fun......can someone explain please

[Deceangi]

locationless caches

Sounds like fun......can someone explain please

 

They were a type of cache were the owner stated you had to find a specific type of object. Stone Bridge, Camera Obscure, Fire Stations to name just a few. You had to obtain the coordinates and usually provide a photo with your GPS in it. Each location could be logged only once, the most famous or infamous was the Yellow Jeep [real one] which had thousands of logs to it. When GC stopped listing them, and Waymarking was created they were all removed from the site.

[+Team Sieni]

Sounds like fun......can someone explain please

 

Rather than saying "here's a thing (a cache) come and find it" a locationless cache says "here's a category of thing, find one (anywhere in the world) and log it" Such things as unusual speed limits and yellow jeeps and so on. So - find an example of ... a church with a wobbly spire ... whatever and log it as a find on my "churches with wobbly spires" geocache.

 

These are now managed on the Waymarking site which I will be so bold as to say handles this specific concept a whole lot better than Reverse Caches did (except of course, they won't count to your cache find numbers). Unfortunately the move to Waymarking of Virtuals and Reverse Caches was done in a rather high handed manner which got a lot of people's backs up, so this thread will probably degenerate into a Waymarking slanging match, amid cries of "bring back virtuals"

[+Happy Humphrey]

locationless caches

Sounds like fun......can someone explain please

Here we go...

There are several approaches, but it might help to give an example.

 

You're about to go out geocaching, or perhaps just for a drive in the country and you'll take your GPSr along. Beforehand, you'll have looked for an interesting-sounding Waymarking category. A category (or, strictly-speaking sub-category) is the equivalent of the old Locationless Cache.

 

Let's say, you like lighthouses. There are two types (i.e. two Locationless Caches): "Coastal" and "Land-locked". You might note from looking at the map that you'll be venturing somewhere near a coastal lighthouse.

A quick search shows that the lighthouse in question has never been logged by anyone (in this example, it HAS been logged by me!). So when you get there you take a photo, save a waypoint and find out about it. On returning home, you log the lighthouse and upload the photo, using your research to add some useful information in your log.

 

I went through this very process recently: see Cap Camarat.

 

An intentional side-effect, is that my log is now the equivalent of a Virtual Cache and people can go to the lighthouse and log it. Also, if you're in the area geocaching, it's easy to see if any of these "Virtuals" are nearby simply by using the link (...all nearby waymarks on Waymarking.com) on the cache web page (you'll need to be logged in to see the link).

 

I hope that's helpful, and please can we avoid the "I can't see the point of Waymarking, bring back virtuals" posts, which are REALLY tedious...

 

HH

Edited August 14, 2007 by Happy Humphrey

[+mongoose39uk]

Sounds like fun......can someone explain please

 

Rather than saying "here's a thing (a cache) come and find it" a locationless cache says "here's a category of thing, find one (anywhere in the world) and log it" Such things as unusual speed limits and yellow jeeps and so on. So - find an example of ... a church with a wobbly spire ... whatever and log it as a find on my "churches with wobbly spires" geocache.

 

These are now managed on the Waymarking site which I will be so bold as to say handles this specific concept a whole lot better than Reverse Caches did (except of course, they won't count to your cache find numbers). Unfortunately the move to Waymarking of Virtuals and Reverse Caches was done in a rather high handed manner which got a lot of people's backs up, so this thread will probably degenerate into a Waymarking slanging match, amid cries of "bring back virtuals"

 

They must have vastly improved the site in the last couple of weeks then. It was very clumsy and bears no relation to what a locationless cache was.

 

We are not going to get them back but to say Waymarking is better is wrong, it is different not better.

 

However this is not on topic and if that old boiler of an argument is to come up surely it should be a different thread.

[+mollyjak]

Yes - we enjoyed the ones we did

[+Happy Humphrey]

However this is not on topic and if that old boiler of an argument is to come up surely it should be a different thread.

Quite! So why did you post that nonsense here then...

[+Big Wolf]

At least the virtual caches are still 'logable' but its a pity that new ones cant be added. My favorite has to be the one on the site of the Blàr Allt a' Bhonnaich near Stirling.

[+Pengy&Tigger]

However this is not on topic and if that old boiler of an argument is to come up surely it should be a different thread.

Quite! So why did you post that nonsense here then...

I think mongers meant Waymarking was off the topic.

[+TrailGators]

At least the virtual caches are still 'logable' but its a pity that new ones cant be added. My favorite has to be the one on the site of the Blàr Allt a' Bhonnaich near Stirling.

I agree. Maybe one day Waymarking and Geocaching will be merged and they all will be back.

[nobby.nobbs]

i only did a few but i thought they were a good laugh, so yes i do miss them but i don't want to do Waymarking

[+Semper Questio]

Absolutely. I loved most of the locationless caches and wish I had gotten more of them before they were shutdown.

[+TrailGators]

Absolutely. I loved most of the locationless caches and wish I had gotten more of them before they were shutdown.

I only got two...

[+The Wombles]

Have you missed them at all? Quite often we will come across something such as a round house, water wheel. Hippie VW and say, "typical, at last see one of these and no longer locationless caches to be had". It was the variety of things that people came across, Dovecotes, Poets graves and such like that made it fun with their photographs..................so are they missed?

 

Graham and Lorna, I certainly miss them - there is a certain postbox opposite the White Horse in Cherhill (coming down the A4 from Avebury) which laughs at me every time I pass it. How come I didn't notice it when I could have logged it

 

I owned three locationless caches and enjoyed the logs from around the world, and also enjoyed logging other locationless - a very different challenge.

Edited August 14, 2007 by The Wombles

[+Happy Humphrey]

I think mongers meant Waymarking was off the topic.

Not really off topic, as it's how you now log (what used to be) locationless caches. So they haven't gone away.

 

That's why I went to the trouble of giving an example which also happens to be VERY similar to one of the old locationless caches (it was called "Lighthouses of the World" and the modern one is called "Coastal Lighthouses").

[+Bill D (wwh)]

The Wombles wrote:

...there is a certain postbox opposite the White Horse in Cherhill (coming down the A4 from Avebury) which laughs at me every time I pass it.

Aaaggh! I missed that one as well...!

 

Yes, I do miss locationless caches. I owned one, for Hillfigures, and indeed the Cherhill White Horse was one of the logs on it. I did quite a few too, some of which I set out to do, and some where I noticed something and remembered there was a locationless for it.

[+GAZ]

Yep....I miss 'em as well. Seen loads of things that I would have logged by now, but hey-ho, they are still on Waymarking.....not that I have logged any on there!

[Deceangi]

The Wombles wrote:

...there is a certain postbox opposite the White Horse in Cherhill (coming down the A4 from Avebury) which laughs at me every time I pass it.

Aaaggh! I missed that one as well...!

 

Yes, I do miss locationless caches. I owned one, for Hillfigures, and indeed the Cherhill White Horse was one of the logs on it. I did quite a few too, some of which I set out to do, and some where I noticed something and remembered there was a locationless for it.

 

Now Gentlemen if your referring to post boxes which do not carry a E on them but another letter. Please remember that the boxes owners requested that this particular Locationless cache was removed from the site, due to the risk of scallywags using the information to go about their nefarious deeds.

[+Simply Paul]

I miss them too. I didn't think gc.com worked well with for them, but they did add some extra variety to the game. If I felt really strongly about them though, I'd set up a Waymarking profile...

[+Happy Humphrey]

However this is not on topic and if that old boiler of an argument is to come up surely it should be a different thread.

Quite! So why did you post that nonsense here then...

 

After some PM correspondence with Mongoose (thanks for the patience) I suspect that those who think that Waymarking is somehow different or inferior to Locationless are simply confused by the terminology.

 

Locationless Cache = Waymarking subcategory

Locationless Cache Log = Waymark

 

In a Locationless Cache you could only log a location once. If it had already been logged you had to seek out another example.

In a Waymarking subcategory you can only create a waymark once. If it's already been created then you have to seek out another example.

 

The fact that you can "log a waymark" is irrelevant in the context of Locationless Caches.

 

Mongoose gave me an example of a good locationless with British possibilities;

Retired Prisons

 

I hope that helps answer "Have we missed locationless" by explaining that they're still there if you're interested!

[+mongoose39uk]

I may be patient but am unconvinced.

 

I still will not be using Waymarking

 

I still miss location less caches.

 

Waymarking is not and never will be an adequate replacement.

[+Happy Humphrey]

Waymarking is not and never will be an adequate replacement.

A remarkable prediction!

But, if that's your gut feeling then I'm happy for you to ignore locationless in whatever form they exist... It's only a game after all, and you're not obliged to play.

 

In the meantime I'll look out for Retired Prisons, Lighthouses, Simulacra (still haven't found one) and any other locationless that take my fancy.

[markandlynn]

At least the virtual caches are still 'logable' but its a pity that new ones cant be added. My favorite has to be the one on the site of the Blàr Allt a' Bhonnaich near Stirling.

I agree. Maybe one day Waymarking and Geocaching will be merged and they all will be back.

 

The back end architechture of the Waymarking site (ie fully scalable) is going to be the same as the new version of the geocaching site (Jeremy has posted this somewhere) at that point some integration of the two sites has been promised.

 

I'd bet quite a lot that when waymark stats show on your profile it will see a surge in popularity even though its not about the numbers is it ?

 

The waymark for wi fi hotspots sounds usefull if we started to populate it in the UK.

 

Locationless caches got silly when one for road signs was listed.

[+Team Sieni]

There is no need to miss reverse caches. I got (and will get when I'm back on my feet again) as much pleasure from hunting down disused railway tunnels and meridian markers and logging them on Waymarking as I ever would have were they reverse caches. I don't miss them at all - quite the reverse. It was Huga's "Meridian Markers" reverse cache (now a Waymarking category) that fired my interest.

 

What you will miss, of course, is the numbers, as they don't appear on your GC.com profile.

 

When Virtuals, reverse caches, et al were bundled off to Waymarking without a by-your-leave some people took understandable offence. The initial release of the Waymarking software was poor and the whole thing was poorly managed. That left a bad taste in the mouth and many people are simply set against ever using Waymarking because of it, and will not revisit the site. That's fair enough. To say "I'm not interested in Waymarking" or "I don't want to use Waymarking" is entirely logically consistent. To say it "never will be an adequate replacement" is ... shall we say ... less so.

[+Birders]

We don't chase the Waymarks, or whatever they're called, but we did enjoy locationaless caches very much.

[+mongoose39uk]

Can we please bring this back on topic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[+Gralorn]

We do miss the locationless it must be said, Apart from telling the post box thieves where they are we have some lovely old post boxes around our county, the one that Mr Womble and Bill mention at Cherhill White Horse and there are others at Slaughterford and Chalfield Manor. Never found them though until it was too late to use them....apart from posting letters of course.

[+maxkim]

We miss them, only last week we found a sphinx.... and all comented about 'what a shame it was that they have gone' I don't see why they couldn't have been dealt with the same way as virts.... and allowed to die off in time. We tried Way pointing but it misses something in our view. Long live caching.

[+Happy Humphrey]

We miss them, only last week we found a sphinx.... and all comented about 'what a shame it was that they have gone' I don't see why they couldn't have been dealt with the same way as virts.... and allowed to die off in time. We tried Way pointing but it misses something in our view. Long live caching.

Please, explain the difference between a "locationless" sphinx and a "Sphinx Sculptures" sphinx.

I honestly can't see why you're unable to log it in the newer locationless format, but you think it's OK in the old format (which I thought was crummy in comparison!). Isn't it the same sphinx?

 

No, it's not off-topic to ask why someone thinks they can't log a locationlesss cache!

[+mongoose39uk]

We miss them, only last week we found a sphinx.... and all comented about 'what a shame it was that they have gone' I don't see why they couldn't have been dealt with the same way as virts.... and allowed to die off in time. We tried Way pointing but it misses something in our view. Long live caching.

Please, explain the difference between a "locationless" sphinx and a "Sphinx Sculptures" sphinx.

I honestly can't see why you're unable to log it in the newer locationless format, but you think it's OK in the old format (which I thought was crummy in comparison!). Isn't it the same sphinx?

 

No, it's not off-topic to ask why someone thinks they can't log a locationlesss cache!

 

Thats simple, its not a locationless cache, it is a waymark. It is not on Geocaching it is on Waymarking and is therefore off topic.

 

He asked do we miss locationless caches, not do we miss waymarks.

[SlytherinAlex]

However this is not on topic and if that old boiler of an argument is to come up surely it should be a different thread.

Quite! So why did you post that nonsense here then...

No more nonsense than your post. The OP asked if people missed locationless caches, not for a tutorial on Waymarking.

[+Happy Humphrey]

Thats simple, its not a locationless cache, it is a waymark. It is not on Geocaching it is on Waymarking and is therefore off topic.

Oh dear - I think I touched a raw nerve here!

Apologies to self-appointed moderators, guardians of serious geocaching and experts on locationless caches (not!).

 

You were unable to point to any fundamental difference between locationless caches and Waymarking subcategories (that's because the latter replaced the former). Therefore, when talking about Waymarking subcategories I was talking about locationless caches. Therefore, it was on-topic. It was just not what you wanted to hear.

 

However, I will resign now in the face of extreme hostility...bye.

[SlytherinAlex]

 

You were unable to point to any fundamental difference between locationless caches and Waymarking subcategories...

Waymarking isn't a sub-category - it's a totally different thing, on a different website.

[+dino-irl]

It amazes me how people can be so vociferously opposed to Waymarking yet take great joy out of Trigpointing.....the exact same arguments against Waymarking could be used to argue against Trigpointing

[+mongoose39uk]

True, then again I cannot remember the last time I logged a trig either.

[+Gralorn]

Must just say here that we are Geocachers and that is our hobby/past time. We are not Waymarkers, Trig Pointers or Megalithic stone hunters as they are other hobbies/ past times that others enjoy on different web sites!

[+dino-irl]

But Waymarking is linked to Geocaching, it's similar and it's already been stated that it will be combined with Geocaching in the future. What will that do to the arguments then.

 

Btw I don't Waymark and I'm not just stirring the pot. I just find people's objections to Waymarking interesting.

[+Team Sieni]

From this thread I guess there are the following categories of people:

 

Those who thought nothing of locationless, and don't miss them a bit.

 

Those who found searching for these things a bit of a diversion while Geocaching, but not inherently interesting enough to start using another site. They miss them somewhat.

 

Those who enjoyed finding these things, but only as an integral part of Geocaching, and would rather die a slow and horrible death than visit the website that may not be named (other than to be abused, or to be categorised as strictly off topic, or both simultaneously ). They do miss them and get very very angry at the same time.

 

Those serene, open minded, calm and zen-like beings who enjoyed finding these unusual and interesting things and visiting them for their own sake, and can still do so at the expense of going to another site, and don't miss them at all. Some may even express an opinion that it is an enhanced experience. (maaan)

 

I wonder, Is it possible that ther are also those who just enjoyed the increase in find count that these provided, and miss that only. Nooo - too cycnical of me! We don't have any cachers like that ... do we?

 

Happy caching!

 

Eddited to correct grammar, add a big IMHO and add some more smileys :D

Edited August 17, 2007 by Team Sieni

[+FunLovingGeocacher]

Here's my opinion. If I found a waypoint and the stats appeared on the geocacher I might be interested. I've looked at waypoints but it does not really interest me.

To keep on top I do miss them and found out about them by accident a few months before they got "muggled"

[+FunLovingGeocacher]

Here's my opinion. If I found a waypoint and the stats appeared on the geocacher I might be interested. I've looked at waypoints but it does not really interest me.

To keep on topic I do miss them and found out about them by accident a few months before they got "muggled"

[+John Stead]

I miss them (and the numbers they added to my stats!!!).

I've just been editing my GSAK file to show where I found a number of locationless caches in 2002-2004 as they showed the original cache coords which were not of course where I found them. The result was that before editing I was shown as having caches in Texas and other states of the USA when I have never been West of Ireland.

[+Flackadder]

Yes, I miss them. You have a few items in your mind you know are looking for. Keeps journeys a little interesting.

[+t.a.folk]

Yes .

We researched lots and even planned days out & mini holidays around finding some of them .

But we had found lots of what were possible for us , so our finds were getting scarce towards the end .

 

 

Veering off topic .

For me/us to revisit the same features or submit the same photos for Waymarking feels lacking in the all important novelty factor .

But we have recently started looking for " new to us " things on the other site .

One found recently so the ball may have started rolling for us .

[Wilting]

Am I unique in enjoying any pastime which takes me to interesting places and/or provides a bit of a challenge? I'm really not bothered about logging too much nor do I see any real distinction between Locationless Caches/Waymarks. Neither do I see any problem about discussing the replacement for Locationless caches wherever they've been moved to.

 

I'm just happy to be here

[+Fifth Barrowcliffe]

At least the virtual caches are still 'logable' but its a pity that new ones cant be added. My favorite has to be the one on the site of the Blàr Allt a' Bhonnaich near Stirling.

 

One of my favourites as well. (I know a the response if a bit off topic!)