Waymarking.com

[+whistler & co.]

The thing that disturbs me about the whole Waymarking + geocaching on one site idea is that I don't want my maps cluttered up. Can you imagine using the nice, new gc.com/google earth maps and rather than just caches (of the various types) having an icon, now every stop sign and fast food joint and neon sign and historical marker (and so on...) is shown? Yikes! I sincerely hope that we will have the option of using the "ignore" feature for waymarks if the two sites are merged!

[+wimseyguy]

I'm still not a big Waymarking fan, but I do believe that in time, it will become more popular than geocaching. Think about how many people who you explain geocaching to get that puzzled 'you do what' look in their eye. Finding a tupperware/ammocan/35mm/bison tube container hidden just about anywhere doesn't appeal to everyone. And that's just fine.

 

But sooner, not later, many many people will have access to GPS devices, and they will use them to locate places, not containers at specific locations. If there is a listing service that helps them locate categories of locations they find interesting, they will use that listing service. I think Waymarking will get huge, ginormous in fact. And to do so it must be inclusive, not exclusive.

 

Me-I prefer to just use my GPS to find hidden containers for now. Maybe I'll change someday, maybe not. I've been told that I am quite resistant to change.

[+Ambrosia]

I'm still not a big Waymarking fan, but I do believe that in time, it will become more popular than geocaching. Think about how many people who you explain geocaching to get that puzzled 'you do what' look in their eye. Finding a tupperware/ammocan/35mm/bison tube container hidden just about anywhere doesn't appeal to everyone. And that's just fine.

 

But sooner, not later, many many people will have access to GPS devices, and they will use them to locate places, not containers at specific locations. If there is a listing service that helps them locate categories of locations they find interesting, they will use that listing service. I think Waymarking will get huge, ginormous in fact. And to do so it must be inclusive, not exclusive.

 

Me-I prefer to just use my GPS to find hidden containers for now. Maybe I'll change someday, maybe not. I've been told that I am quite resistant to change.

Exactly. I think that the future possibilities for Waymarking are mind boggling. It will have to come mostly from people who aren't cachers, as you said, because they won't have any preconceived ideas about what Waymarking is or should be.

[+Team Cotati]

I'm still not a big Waymarking fan, but I do believe that in time, it will become more popular than geocaching. Think about how many people who you explain geocaching to get that puzzled 'you do what' look in their eye. Finding a tupperware/ammocan/35mm/bison tube container hidden just about anywhere doesn't appeal to everyone. And that's just fine.

 

But sooner, not later, many many people will have access to GPS devices, and they will use them to locate places, not containers at specific locations. If there is a listing service that helps them locate categories of locations they find interesting, they will use that listing service. I think Waymarking will get huge, ginormous in fact. And to do so it must be inclusive, not exclusive.

 

Me-I prefer to just use my GPS to find hidden containers for now. Maybe I'll change someday, maybe not. I've been told that I am quite resistant to change.

Exactly. I think that the future possibilities for Waymarking are mind boggling. It will have to come mostly from people who aren't cachers, as you said, because they won't have any preconceived ideas about what Waymarking is or should be.

 

It is already quite mindboggling.

[+sbell111]

Yes, you surely could do that. Providing that there exists someone with the requisite brilliance who has previously established the environment.

 

Where you'd find that someone, now therein lies the challenge.

I have this fear about responding to your posts because there is such a large chance that you are trolling, but you realize that the breadth of options regarding waymarks is large, right? You also know that if you don't like Waymarking that no one will ever force you to pull up the website, right?

The thing that disturbs me about the whole Waymarking + geocaching on one site idea is that I don't want my maps cluttered up. ...

As far as I know, TPTB have never stated that the two sites will be merged. Even if they allowed the maps to pull up geocaches and waymarks at the same time, I'm sure that you would be able to deselct one or the other.

I'm still not a big Waymarking fan, but I do believe that in time, it will become more popular than geocaching. Think about how many people who you explain geocaching to get that puzzled 'you do what' look in their eye. Finding a tupperware/ammocan/35mm/bison tube container hidden just about anywhere doesn't appeal to everyone. And that's just fine.

 

But sooner, not later, many many people will have access to GPS devices, and they will use them to locate places, not containers at specific locations. ...

I completely agree. TPTB have been smart to position the three games to attract people who look for different kinds of fun.

[+sbell111]

Exactly. I think that the future possibilities for Waymarking are mind boggling. It will have to come mostly from people who aren't cachers, as you said, because they won't have any preconceived ideas about what Waymarking is or should be.

It is already quite mindboggling.

It sure is. There's something at WM.com for just about anybody.

 

Here's a particularly cool one.

[+Ambrosia]

Exactly. I think that the future possibilities for Waymarking are mind boggling. It will have to come mostly from people who aren't cachers, as you said, because they won't have any preconceived ideas about what Waymarking is or should be.

It is already quite mindboggling.

It sure is. There's something at WM.com for just about anybody.

 

Here's a particularly cool one.

We just drove past this one (I've driven by many times but never got out and looked), and I wanted to get my husband to stop. I guess it wasn't on his list of things to do.

[+ReadyOrNot]

Exactly. I think that the future possibilities for Waymarking are mind boggling. It will have to come mostly from people who aren't cachers, as you said, because they won't have any preconceived ideas about what Waymarking is or should be.

It is already quite mindboggling.

It sure is. There's something at WM.com for just about anybody.

 

Here's a particularly cool one.

 

Waymarking will never be as popular, for the same reason snorting sugar isn't as addictive as crack. Folks that geocache do it to a level that can be considered addictive. Waymarking may have a broader appeal, but it just doesn't have that "Addictive" factor to it that will make it flourish. It's cool, yes. It's neat, yes. But it's just missing that "WOW" factor.

[+sbell111]

Waymarking will never be as popular, for the same reason snorting sugar isn't as addictive as crack. Folks that geocache do it to a level that can be considered addictive. Waymarking may have a broader appeal, but it just doesn't have that "Addictive" factor to it that will make it flourish. It's cool, yes. It's neat, yes. But it's just missing that "WOW" factor.

Tell that to the former big numbers cachers who now primarily waymark.

[+Ambrosia]

Exactly. I think that the future possibilities for Waymarking are mind boggling. It will have to come mostly from people who aren't cachers, as you said, because they won't have any preconceived ideas about what Waymarking is or should be.

It is already quite mindboggling.

It sure is. There's something at WM.com for just about anybody.

 

Here's a particularly cool one.

 

Waymarking will never be as popular, for the same reason snorting sugar isn't as addictive as crack. Folks that geocache do it to a level that can be considered addictive. Waymarking may have a broader appeal, but it just doesn't have that "Addictive" factor to it that will make it flourish. It's cool, yes. It's neat, yes. But it's just missing that "WOW" factor.

Waymarking can be pretty darn addicting. Even more than Geocaching, for OCD types like me.

[+tabulator32]

I've concluded that Waymarking just isn't as big as geocaching. Here's an example:

 

The Geocache: The Coffee Pot

Waymark #1: The Coffee Pot

Waymark #2 Coffee Pot, The

 

All take you to the same location. The Geocache was hidden 6/29/2007 and has been found 78 times.

Waymark #1 was created 8/16/2005 and has had 3 logged visits.

Waymark #2 was created 11/27/2006 and has had 2 logged visits - and one of these people also logged waymark #1, so really there were only 4 unique Waymarking visitors.

 

The numbers are pretty clear. Geocaching is definitely more popular than Waymarking at this location.

 

I do believe the above data is only indicative of the fact geocachers consumer far more coffee than waypointers.

 

[+ReadyOrNot]

Waymarking will never be as popular, for the same reason snorting sugar isn't as addictive as crack. Folks that geocache do it to a level that can be considered addictive. Waymarking may have a broader appeal, but it just doesn't have that "Addictive" factor to it that will make it flourish. It's cool, yes. It's neat, yes. But it's just missing that "WOW" factor.

Tell that to the former big numbers cachers who now primarily waymark.

 

OK I guess Portland has a big anti-Waymarking shield surrounding it. Either that or it's not that popular.... Unless technology has advanced, I'd say the later is true. If you enjoy it, that's great! But don't try to convince me it's popular.

[+sbell111]

Waymarking will never be as popular, for the same reason snorting sugar isn't as addictive as crack. Folks that geocache do it to a level that can be considered addictive. Waymarking may have a broader appeal, but it just doesn't have that "Addictive" factor to it that will make it flourish. It's cool, yes. It's neat, yes. But it's just missing that "WOW" factor.

Tell that to the former big numbers cachers who now primarily waymark.

OK I guess Portland has a big anti-Waymarking shield surrounding it. Either that or it's not that popular.... Unless technology has advanced, I'd say the later is true. If you enjoy it, that's great! But don't try to convince me it's popular.

I'm not trying to convince you that it's popular. However, it's still young.

 

Had you joined gecaching earlier, you would likely have claimed that it would never get off the ground because very few people were playing.

[+ReadyOrNot]

Waymarking will never be as popular, for the same reason snorting sugar isn't as addictive as crack. Folks that geocache do it to a level that can be considered addictive. Waymarking may have a broader appeal, but it just doesn't have that "Addictive" factor to it that will make it flourish. It's cool, yes. It's neat, yes. But it's just missing that "WOW" factor.

Tell that to the former big numbers cachers who now primarily waymark.

OK I guess Portland has a big anti-Waymarking shield surrounding it. Either that or it's not that popular.... Unless technology has advanced, I'd say the later is true. If you enjoy it, that's great! But don't try to convince me it's popular.

I'm not trying to convince you that it's popular. However, it's still young.

 

Had you joined gecaching earlier, you would likely have claimed that it would never get off the ground because very few people were playing.

 

That would be an interesting bit of research. I wonder how many of the early founders of the game/sport/hobby sat around in a forum complaining about these kind of things... Kinda makes me want to go out and cache.

[MikeB3542]

Waymarking is just locationless (reverse) caching. I don't think that it has much in common with virtual caches, where you are looking for a specific place.

 

I think the folks who really enjoyed the old locationless caches transitioned to Waymarking pretty easily. Some of those old-timers racked up some pretty significant numbers in the locationless cache category.

 

For newer cachers, like myself, who got into this after all those types of caches were banned, it seems a little pointless. I have dabbled a bit anyway and can't say that I am hooked yet.

 

I agree that geocaching will always be far more popular -- finding a cache is satisfying for a lot of different reasons: being outdoors, challenging terrain, finding hidden stuff, solving puzzles, and discovering really cool places. Waymarking really only hits that last one.

[+TrailGators]

Waymarking can be pretty darn addicting. Even more than Geocaching, for OCD types like me.

But you don't get these with Waymarking.....

[+Ambrosia]

Waymarking can be pretty darn addicting. Even more than Geocaching, for OCD types like me.

But you don't get these with Waymarking.....

 

I don't?!?!? Well then what the heck did I do any of it for?

 

[+Ambrosia]

Waymarking is just locationless (reverse) caching. I don't think that it has much in common with virtual caches, where you are looking for a specific place.

 

I think the folks who really enjoyed the old locationless caches transitioned to Waymarking pretty easily. Some of those old-timers racked up some pretty significant numbers in the locationless cache category.

 

For newer cachers, like myself, who got into this after all those types of caches were banned, it seems a little pointless. I have dabbled a bit anyway and can't say that I am hooked yet.

 

I agree that geocaching will always be far more popular -- finding a cache is satisfying for a lot of different reasons: being outdoors, challenging terrain, finding hidden stuff, solving puzzles, and discovering really cool places. Waymarking really only hits that last one.

Actually, once someone creates a waymark, it becomes somewhat like a virtual. You can look it up on its own page online, put the coords in your GPS, visit the location, then go back online and log it (visit it) and post pictures of your experience. Seems pretty much the same as all the other virtuals I've done over the years. You are looking for a specific place.

 

And - Except for finding hidden stuff (although that's pretty subjective, as well), Waymarking fits all the criteria you gave, not just the last one:

 

With Waymarking, you can: go outdoors, have challenging terrain, solve puzzles, and discover really cool places.

 

There are a lot of different categories in Waymarking! I think that a lot of people just haven't explored the site enough and don't realize all that's offered there.

[+tozainamboku]

Waymarking can be pretty darn addicting. Even more than Geocaching, for OCD types like me.

But you don't get these with Waymarking.....

No, but you get these

Waymarking Awards:

waymarks posted

[+Harriet the Spy]

Great now you are messing with my OCD again! Your awards are so.... shiny

[+sbell111]

Waymarking can be pretty darn addicting. Even more than Geocaching, for OCD types like me.

But you don't get these with Waymarking.....

No, but you get these

Waymarking Awards:

waymarks posted

As Harriet the Spy mentioned, you also get a cool grid on your profile page showing all of the waymarks that you have found/created. Between the awards and the grid, I think the smiley lovers are covered.

[+briansnat]

Waymarking is just locationless (reverse) caching. I don't think that it has much in common with virtual caches, where you are looking for a specific place.

 

I think the folks who really enjoyed the old locationless caches transitioned to Waymarking pretty easily. Some of those old-timers racked up some pretty significant numbers in the locationless cache category.

 

For newer cachers, like myself, who got into this after all those types of caches were banned, it seems a little pointless. I have dabbled a bit anyway and can't say that I am hooked yet.

 

I agree that geocaching will always be far more popular -- finding a cache is satisfying for a lot of different reasons: being outdoors, challenging terrain, finding hidden stuff, solving puzzles, and discovering really cool places. Waymarking really only hits that last one.

 

That is a common misconception about Waymarking, Once a waymark is posted it essentially becomes a virtual cache. You get the coordinates, use your GPS to find the place (object or whatever), gather proof of your visit and log it online. You get outdoors, discover cool places, possibly negotiate challenging terrain (example). Basically the same as a virtual cache.

 

Sure there is no puzzle solving or finding hidden stuff but there generally was little of that with virtuals either.

[+team lagonda]

Waymarking sounds like alot of fun to me..just like geocaching ,just without all the geo trash ..plus you dont have to worry bout all the rules like getting permission when placing a mark..this opens up a whole vast new area to explore....gets rid of the ''big brother '' aspect of geocaching and the bureaucracy..no offence to the moderators....another advantage i guess would be no cache to maintain,,the owner of the site does it for you....

Edited December 21, 2007 by team lagonda

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

As soon as I can get Waymarks in a PQ like geocaches I will be all over it!

 

Geocaches and Waymarks combined in GSAK, on my GPS and on my maps - woohoo!

 

As far as going to Waymarking.com and digging for categories - not so much.

 

My Waymarking - Fishing Holes category did get a hit, just one I think, this year.

 

I guess I really oughta go look, I haven't been there in a while.

 

There was some talk of doing this (PQs), it may already be done... if so all of my cache hunts will include waymarks - I will hunt anything!

[+Miragee]

Waymarking sounds like alot of fun to me..just like geocaching ,just without all the geo trash ..plus you dont have to worry bout all the rules like getting permission when placing a mark..this opens up a whole vast new area to explore....gets rid of the ''big brother '' aspect of geocaching and the bureaucracy..no offence to the moderators....another advantage i guess would be no cache to maintain,,the owner of the site does it for you....

Not exactly. I posted a WiFi Hotspot Waymark and then the coffee shop closed and it was no longer a WiFi Hotspot. I Archived that Waymark. So . . . it depends on the type of Waymark you create whether you have to "perform maintenance."

 

Although, around here, since hardly anyone looks for Waymarks, it isn't as urgent as it would be where people actually participate in that activity . . .

[+Suburban Hillbillies]

Waymarking is like reading to me. I just look at the pictures.

[+TrailGators]

As soon as I can get Waymarks in a PQ like geocaches I will be all over it!

The word is that we will be able to do that next year!

[+TrailGators]

Waymarking is just locationless (reverse) caching. I don't think that it has much in common with virtual caches, where you are looking for a specific place.

 

I think the folks who really enjoyed the old locationless caches transitioned to Waymarking pretty easily. Some of those old-timers racked up some pretty significant numbers in the locationless cache category.

 

For newer cachers, like myself, who got into this after all those types of caches were banned, it seems a little pointless. I have dabbled a bit anyway and can't say that I am hooked yet.

 

I agree that geocaching will always be far more popular -- finding a cache is satisfying for a lot of different reasons: being outdoors, challenging terrain, finding hidden stuff, solving puzzles, and discovering really cool places. Waymarking really only hits that last one.

 

That is a common misconception about Waymarking, Once a waymark is posted it essentially becomes a virtual cache. You get the coordinates, use your GPS to find the place (object or whatever), gather proof of your visit and log it online. You get outdoors, discover cool places, possibly negotiate challenging terrain (example). Basically the same as a virtual cache.

 

Sure there is no puzzle solving or finding hidden stuff but there generally was little of that with virtuals either.

This is true. They are like locationless caches when you find/create them and virtuals when you visit them. The only down (and plus) side is that you know what most of them look like before you visit them. Edited December 21, 2007 by TrailGators

[+sbell111]

This is true. They are like locationless caches when you find/create them and virtuals when you visit them. The only down (and plus) side is that you know what most of them look like before you visit them.

That will be another 'problem' that's solved by PQs.

 

Once you have a PQ built that excludes waymarks that you are not interested in, you will be able to search for the waypoint 'blind' and not check your pda until you arrive on-site.

[+TrailGators]

This is true. They are like locationless caches when you find/create them and virtuals when you visit them. The only down (and plus) side is that you know what most of them look like before you visit them.

That will be another 'problem' that's solved by PQs.

 

Once you have a PQ built that excludes waymarks that you are not interested in, you will be able to search for the waypoint 'blind' and not check your pda until you arrive on-site.

Good point! Plus if you have only selected the waymark categories that you enjoy, you won't have to worry about driving 5 miles only to find some KFC. That problem is gone as well for the blind thrill seeking type of hunters.

[+wandererrob]

You have had the pleasure of reading yet another urban legend

 

Beat me to it

 

and yes, from what I've seen a large number of waymarks are like this. I add the category to my ignore list and whittle it down to those of some interest which ends up being few.

[+Renegade Knight]

...Waymarking will never be as popular, for the same reason snorting sugar isn't as addictive as crack. Folks that geocache do it to a level that can be considered addictive. Waymarking may have a broader appeal, but it just doesn't have that "Addictive" factor to it that will make it flourish. It's cool, yes. It's neat, yes. But it's just missing that "WOW" factor.

 

I agree, and maybe I'm wrong. BUT. If Waymarking was the way of the future then waypoint.org would have been much bigger and better than it was when all the snarky comment about "like virtuals go to waypoint.org" were made.

 

There are things that can be done to change it, but as it it it's Caching, Wamarking, Waypoint.org in about that order for "interesting things to do with your time".

[+sbell111]

Waymarking is a game.

Waypoint.org is not a game.

[+Renegade Knight]

... This is true. They are like locationless caches when you find/create them and virtuals when you visit them. The only down (and plus) side is that you know what most of them look like before you visit them.

 

They are fairly close to locationless when found, not quite so close to virtuals. The worst thing is that they didn't solve the fundamental problem with locationless caches. That's that only one person can find each one.

 

Some locationless caches actually interested me. One was the Frank Lloyd Right House locationless. There was one house in Bliss Idaho. But I can't log it. I did the work, went to Bliss, realized I needed to do more work...then double checked. Whoop's. Some traveler blowing through the state found it and that ruled me out and made any further effort a waste of my time since yes, I like the visit/find/smilie/gold star.

[+briansnat]

Waymarking is just locationless (reverse) caching. I don't think that it has much in common with virtual caches, where you are looking for a specific place.

 

I think the folks who really enjoyed the old locationless caches transitioned to Waymarking pretty easily. Some of those old-timers racked up some pretty significant numbers in the locationless cache category.

 

For newer cachers, like myself, who got into this after all those types of caches were banned, it seems a little pointless. I have dabbled a bit anyway and can't say that I am hooked yet.

 

I agree that geocaching will always be far more popular -- finding a cache is satisfying for a lot of different reasons: being outdoors, challenging terrain, finding hidden stuff, solving puzzles, and discovering really cool places. Waymarking really only hits that last one.

 

That is a common misconception about Waymarking, Once a waymark is posted it essentially becomes a virtual cache. You get the coordinates, use your GPS to find the place (object or whatever), gather proof of your visit and log it online. You get outdoors, discover cool places, possibly negotiate challenging terrain (example). Basically the same as a virtual cache.

 

Sure there is no puzzle solving or finding hidden stuff but there generally was little of that with virtuals either.

This is true. They are like locationless caches when you find/create them and virtuals when you visit them. The only down (and plus) side is that you know what most of them look like before you visit them.

 

I knew what a lot of virtuals looked like before I visited too. There are often photos, sometimes in the cache page text and often in the logs.

[+Harriet the Spy]

... This is true. They are like locationless caches when you find/create them and virtuals when you visit them. The only down (and plus) side is that you know what most of them look like before you visit them.

 

They are fairly close to locationless when found, not quite so close to virtuals. The worst thing is that they didn't solve the fundamental problem with locationless caches. That's that only one person can find each one.

 

Some locationless caches actually interested me. One was the Frank Lloyd Right House locationless. There was one house in Bliss Idaho. But I can't log it. I did the work, went to Bliss, realized I needed to do more work...then double checked. Whoop's. Some traveler blowing through the state found it and that ruled me out and made any further effort a waste of my time since yes, I like the visit/find/smilie/gold star.

 

I searched within a hundred miles of Bliss Idaho. It seems your house is still available to waymark.

http://www.Waymarking.com/cat/details.aspx...=3&id=83314 Do you still have the cords and pictures for it?

Edited December 21, 2007 by Harriet the Spy

[+WalruZ]

I've actually waymarked on and off since the site was established. I treat them like photo-virtuals, meaning that I require (of myself) a photo on-site to document a find. Most owners don't strictly require such a thing, but I play the game the way I want to, and that's what I make myself do.

 

I also enjoy finding not-yet-waymarked items, much like locationless caches of days gone by. The main tool for Waymarking such items is actually the digital camera. Once an item is spotted, many pictures are taken including one of myself onsite and one of my GPS screen showing the coords. I can then, at my leisure, do online reseach, organize the photos and write up a waymark page and submit it.

 

I find that it's not an either-or proposition. I waymark as I geocache. The combined experience is richer than either experience by itself.

 

A few random items of mine that I like...

 

A fountain in Monterey

 

A muffler man in San Jose

 

A Moon tree in Berkeley (these are hard to find)

 

An outdoor sculpture in Palo Alto (abstract sculpture is easy to find)

 

A Terrain 4 hiking trail

 

A 6 Million dollar pedestrian bridge (must be suspension type)

 

A landmark El Camino Bell in San Francisco (my wife's category!)

 

My local farmers market

 

An incredible overlook in Big Sur (there's no such thing as 'vacation waymarks')

 

Pikachu! (an exclusive category - this is the only visitable example in the US.)

Edited December 21, 2007 by WalruZ

[+TrailGators]

Waymarking is just locationless (reverse) caching. I don't think that it has much in common with virtual caches, where you are looking for a specific place.

 

I think the folks who really enjoyed the old locationless caches transitioned to Waymarking pretty easily. Some of those old-timers racked up some pretty significant numbers in the locationless cache category.

 

For newer cachers, like myself, who got into this after all those types of caches were banned, it seems a little pointless. I have dabbled a bit anyway and can't say that I am hooked yet.

 

I agree that geocaching will always be far more popular -- finding a cache is satisfying for a lot of different reasons: being outdoors, challenging terrain, finding hidden stuff, solving puzzles, and discovering really cool places. Waymarking really only hits that last one.

 

That is a common misconception about Waymarking, Once a waymark is posted it essentially becomes a virtual cache. You get the coordinates, use your GPS to find the place (object or whatever), gather proof of your visit and log it online. You get outdoors, discover cool places, possibly negotiate challenging terrain (example). Basically the same as a virtual cache.

 

Sure there is no puzzle solving or finding hidden stuff but there generally was little of that with virtuals either.

This is true. They are like locationless caches when you find/create them and virtuals when you visit them. The only down (and plus) side is that you know what most of them look like before you visit them.

 

I knew what a lot of virtuals looked like before I visited too. There are often photos, sometimes in the cache page text and often in the logs.

The keyword was "most." I agree that there are a ton of virts that make you take a photo or have photos. Both my virts are like that, but the point was to prove you made it to a mountain top. But there are tons of virts that are not like this. I only know of one category of Waymarking called Best Kept Secrets that offers a complete surprise. The surprise factor isn't a huge issue with me because I enjoy places that the good virts have taken me regardless if I had seen a photo. For example, a photo of Niagara Falls would never do that amazing view justice.

[+Renegade Knight]

...I searched within a hundred miles of Bliss Idaho. It seems your house is still available to waymark.

http://www.Waymarking.com/cat/details.aspx...=3&id=83314 Do you still have the cords and pictures for it?

Never got that far. I took a chance when I figured out the house was in Bliss and just went there. Bliss isnt' that big...but it's big enough to where random driving around didn't reveal any Frank Lloyd Wright'ish looking houses. (I didn't find the address for the house just it was in bliss on the initial research).

 

Also I was doing a locationless cache at the time. For some reason Waymarking isn't the same. Not even with Locationless. If it were I'd log the "Giant compass Rose" one that I drive by quite often. Maybe it's the one stop shopping angle.

[+Renegade Knight]

Waymarking is a game.

Waypoint.org is not a game.

 

My point exactly. BC (Before Caching) we all had the option to load up a bunch of waypoints and go find cool spots. Few if any did. Caching puts just enough fun itno it to where people actually did load a bunch of waypoints and then go find tupperware. Sometimes in cool spots and sometimes in just spots. Somtimes it's subtle but you have to find the magic to make something take off.

Edited December 21, 2007 by Renegade Knight

[+WebChimp]

I apologize for my misunderstanding. If the KFC waymark is an example of a perfectly good waymark, I don't believe I will be burdening its servers for more information.

 

I use the Waymarking site from time to time, mainly to record benchmarks not found in the NGS database. It's fun to record these previously undocumented benchmarks.

 

There are all sorts of odd things listed as waymarks on the site, and since I don't travel much, I have little use for anything other than the benchmark area. BUT, if I did travel more than I do, I'd probably use the site a great deal more.

[+fizzymagic]

I'm not trying to convince you that it's popular. However, it's still young.

 

Had you joined gecaching earlier, you would likely have claimed that it would never get off the ground because very few people were playing.

When Geocaching was as old as Waymarking is now, it had Pocket Queries. I think. Either that or they were imminent. Since they didn't need to be re-invented, it puzzles me that they are not available for Waymarks.

 

The issue is not one of the length of time it's been available.

 

Waymarking is really fine, though. One of the best things about it is that you can ignore it completely. The only downside to it that I see is that it has removed any possibility that virtual caches will ever be allowed again.

[+sbell111]

I'm not trying to convince you that it's popular. However, it's still young.

 

Had you joined gecaching earlier, you would likely have claimed that it would never get off the ground because very few people were playing.

When Geocaching was as old as Waymarking is now, it had Pocket Queries. I think. Either that or they were imminent. Since they didn't need to be re-invented, it puzzles me that they are not available for Waymarks.

 

The issue is not one of the length of time it's been available.

 

Waymarking is really fine, though. One of the best things about it is that you can ignore it completely. The only downside to it that I see is that it has removed any possibility that virtual caches will ever be allowed again.

Huh? My post didn't have anything to do with PQs.

 

I'm pretty sure that PQs will be available soon. I'd search for the thread that discussed them, but I'd rather not.

[+Team Cotati]

"I will hunt anything!"

 

Truer words have never been spoken.

[+sbell111]

Edited December 21, 2007 by sbell111

[+Team Cotati]

"Tell that to the former big numbers cachers who now primarily waymark."

 

Post their user names and I'll be glad to oblidge.

[+sbell111]

[+ReadyOrNot]

"Tell that to the former big numbers cachers who now primarily waymark."

 

Post their user names and I'll be glad to oblidge.

 

Yeah! What the disturbing avatar guy said!

[+sbell111]

Many of them can be found here

[+BruceS]

So, here is one of the latest waymarks created on the Waymarking.com website.

 

Someone help me with this concept, please.

 

Is this the equivalent of a LPC?

 

I guess I don't come to this forum very often. But seeing it is my waymark I will respond. I find it interesting that out of my over 4000 waymarks I have submitted it is my single KFC waymark that was selected. Couldn't select one of my over 800 waymarks for sites on the National Register of Historic Places or maybe one of my waymarks for veterans memorials. There are over 660 categories at Waymarking and I have waymarks in 530+ of them. For categories that are not my preference (commercial categories etc) I find and submit one or two. Those categories which are more of my interest (historical or art) I submit more. One of the "games" for some (myself included) is to get at least one waymark in the different categories. (called filling the grid)

 

I personally don't participate much with commercial categories at Waymarking but when on a recent trip, I definitely found where they could be useful. After my trip I looked at my recent destinations on my Garmin Nuvi (with a pretty complete POI) and saw many were restaurants and stores, many of which were also categories at Waymarking. (though I didn't add them as waymarks)