Additional Waypoints

[+gazooks]

This is not a dig at our poor overworked Deceangi as I noticed a while back when there was 3 reviewers and it may have been discussed before.

 

A while ago when caches were created you were asked to add additional waypoints such as multi stages, parking and trailheads.

 

Is it me or have they declined in use ?

 

It would be nice if the bare minimum was at least a parking spot (if feasable). Its OK if the caches are local to me but when they are miles away I have no idea where a good spot is when planning a caching day out. I try to use Google Earth to see (if possible) where I can park which is not always easy.

 

What do others think ?

[+PopUpPirate]

Naw, part of the fun can be choosing a route in. OK, if there's ten footpaths to a cache, and one has a CCTV car park then by all means. But if it was mandatory, then it would be daft for drivebys For those of use who use Memory Map, our maps would get EXTREMELY clogged up very quickly. As would GPS's for that point - potentially halving the amount of caches you can store due to the additional waypoint, and complicating your nearest caches list.

 

Parking is sometimes good, let the cache setter use their noggin tho

[+Amberel]

This is not a dig at our poor overworked Deceangi as I noticed a while back when there was 3 reviewers and it may have been discussed before.

 

A while ago when caches were created you were asked to add additional waypoints such as multi stages, parking and trailheads.

 

Is it me or have they declined in use ?

 

It would be nice if the bare minimum was at least a parking spot (if feasable). Its OK if the caches are local to me but when they are miles away I have no idea where a good spot is when planning a caching day out. I try to use Google Earth to see (if possible) where I can park which is not always easy.

 

What do others think ?

I normally do show parking, but it entirely up to the cache setter. There's no obligation, nor, I think, has there ever been, and nor should there be.

 

I almost never visit my own caches by car, usually I arrive by motor-cycle, bicycle or on foot. I therefore I have to investigate where cars can park in order to put that on the cache page. And it's far from black and white - frequently people park nearer to the cache than my published parking places, in locations where personally I would not park my own car.

 

And where do you stop? Not everyone will come by car, though it probably is most common. Should it also be compulsory to give details for those who will come by motor-cycle, public transport, bicycle, on foot, by boat or in a helicopter? I sometimes put in public transport details, though this takes me quite a lot of investigation because I never use it myself. But I wouldn't want it to be compulsory.

 

No more rules than necessary is my opinion, for what it's worth .

 

Rgds, Andy

Edited June 4, 2008 by Amberel

[+Just Roger]

This is not a dig at our poor overworked Deceangi as I noticed a while back when there was 3 reviewers and it may have been discussed before.

 

A while ago when caches were created you were asked to add additional waypoints such as multi stages, parking and trailheads.

 

Is it me or have they declined in use ?

 

It would be nice if the bare minimum was at least a parking spot (if feasable). Its OK if the caches are local to me but when they are miles away I have no idea where a good spot is when planning a caching day out. I try to use Google Earth to see (if possible) where I can park which is not always easy.

 

What do others think ?

 

I quite agree. I have noticed some recently with parking coords given but not shown as an additional waypoint so I have to enter them manually. I think they should all be given when appropriate especially parking, trailhead and stages of a multi.

 

I not saying it should be compulsory to give parking but when it is given - do it as an additional waypoint.

Edited June 4, 2008 by Just Roger

[+dino-irl]

It's compulsory to have AWs for stages of a Multi-cache (virtual stages and physical containers) and or stages in a Puzzle/Mystery cache. The most important of all is the Final Location which is more than likely hidden to all but the owner and the reviewer.

 

Parking coordinates (while a very good idea and very useful) are not compulsory.

 

As an aside if there are coordinates in the cache description but not there as AWs then GSAK has a facility to harvest them from the cache description.. I can't remember exactly how to do it now but it's an option in the main menu.

[+Delta68]

It's compulsory to have AWs for stages of a Multi-cache (virtual stages and physical containers) and or stages in a Puzzle/Mystery cache. The most important of all is the Final Location which is more than likely hidden to all but the owner and the reviewer.

 

But not for Letterbox Hybrids - which frequently resemble Multis.

[+Bambography]

I was thinking recently that they had increased. My old GPS held 500 waypoints so I used to run a PQ of 300 caches to allow for upto 200 AWs. I used to get about 150 which was handy as it allowed for adding in some waypoints on the fly. Now however I notice it filling up quickly leaving very little, if any space for me to add some without deleting while on the hunt.

[+hawkeye81]

It's compulsory to have AWs for stages of a Multi-cache (virtual stages and physical containers) and or stages in a Puzzle/Mystery cache. The most important of all is the Final Location which is more than likely hidden to all but the owner and the reviewer.

 

It would seem not from a cache I attempted last week : GC1CGE2

 

Had there been then the reviewer might have been able to flag that the final coordinates were in the sea (Depending on whether the owner had input the correct final coordinates or the ones which the formula resulted it.)

 

I did find it strange that it was published without AWs as I thought they were compulsory for multi's & puzzles.

[+The Hornet]

As Dino-Irl has said, parking waypoints are an optional extra, they always have been.

 

While it can be handy to have a suggested parking spot we wouldn't want to have to rely on them would we? If we can be relied on to find a hidden box surely we're adult enough to work out for ourselves where we can park?

[+chizu]

I also find parking spots are often in the text rather than as a downloadable waypoint, especially on older caches.

[+The Blorenges]

Noooooo... don't stop using the additional waypoints! I've just got my GSAK to Memory Map export all set up with Lordelphs icons and Edge's script so I now have little feet icons for stages of a multicache, P icons for parking and Q icons for 'question to answer' all over my map and PDA!! It's brilliant!

 

I just have to remember what all the icons actually refer to!

 

Chris

[+ayepee]

As Dino-Irl has said, parking waypoints are an optional extra, they always have been.

 

While it can be handy to have a suggested parking spot we wouldn't want to have to rely on them would we?

 

I very often cache in areas where I haven't got a map with me that shows footpaths,and use my car sat-nav to drive to the approximate location.

 

This combination usually works well, BUT the sat-nav takes me to the nearest point to the cache NOT to the recommended parking or the trailhead from where a suitable footpath runs. This ensures that I can atleast find a footpath that runs in the correct direction. So I am in favour of additional waypoints.

 

ayepee

[+dino-irl]

It's compulsory to have AWs for stages of a Multi-cache (virtual stages and physical containers) and or stages in a Puzzle/Mystery cache. The most important of all is the Final Location which is more than likely hidden to all but the owner and the reviewer.

 

It would seem not from a cache I attempted last week : GC1CGE2

 

Had there been then the reviewer might have been able to flag that the final coordinates were in the sea (Depending on whether the owner had input the correct final coordinates or the ones which the formula resulted it.)

 

I did find it strange that it was published without AWs as I thought they were compulsory for multi's & puzzles.

All I'll say is that you shouldn't have that problem if you come to Ireland and try a cache published since September

 

Seriously, looks like the cache owner is on top of the error anyway so maybe you might get another chance some time.

 

As a note the way that owner has done things is fine. The multi stages are all in the cache text. It's not compulsory to have them as visible AWs and not even as hidden ones if they are virtual stages. It's only the Final Location and any physical stage containers that are required by reviewers. The owner can keep these hidden from other cachers though

[+Gushoneybun]

 

As a note the way that owner has done things is fine. The multi stages are all in the cache text. It's not compulsory to have them as visible AWs and not even as hidden ones if they are virtual stages. It's only the Final Location and any physical stage containers that are required by reviewers. The owner can keep these hidden from other cachers though

 

 

The guidelines state:

 

 

For all caches that include multiple waypoints please report all the additional coordinates using the "Additional Waypoints" feature. If you don't want a set of coordinates displayed on your cache page, be sure to mark them as "hidden". Doing this will hide the coordinates from view by anyone except the owner and website volunteers.

 

 

Shown here underneath: Guidelines that Apply to all Cache Types.

 

 

I often comment in my logs if the coords on newer caches are just in the text and not entered as an AW. If people do not want to enter additional coords thats upto them but if they do, I wish they would enter them as AW's. Please

[+The Hornet]

When I was a reviewer in the UK I required ALL additional waypoint, physical and virtual to be added as AW's. Of course these could be hidden as appropriate but they were visible to me so I could check the coordinates if necessary.

 

Unfortunately I now have to work them out like everybody else

[+dino-irl]

 

As a note the way that owner has done things is fine. The multi stages are all in the cache text. It's not compulsory to have them as visible AWs and not even as hidden ones if they are virtual stages. It's only the Final Location and any physical stage containers that are required by reviewers. The owner can keep these hidden from other cachers though

 

The guidelines state:

 

For all caches that include multiple waypoints please report all the additional coordinates using the "Additional Waypoints" feature. If you don't want a set of coordinates displayed on your cache page, be sure to mark them as "hidden". Doing this will hide the coordinates from view by anyone except the owner and website volunteers.

 

Shown here underneath: Guidelines that Apply to all Cache Types.

 

I often comment in my logs if the coords on newer caches are just in the text and not entered as an AW. If people do not want to enter additional coords thats upto them but if they do, I wish they would enter them as AW's. Please

My emphasis above.

 

That section is a request and not a demand when listing a cache. If an owner refuses despite my own personal wishes the cache will be listed without AWs unless they are physical containers. As I said above the Final Location must be listed prior to publication but most cachers will never see that AW.