Jump to content

Virtual Caches


lcandela123
Followers 3

Recommended Posts

Hi all, I wanted to make an open request for the return of virtual caches. We have found these to be fun. Recently, we tried to set up a few new ones, but were disappointed to learn that they've been discontinued.

 

The site directed me to another geocache site to list the virtual cache, but I haven't looked into it yet. Not sure how this works. Anyway, I like managing all my cache activities on geocaching.com, as it is an excellent and convenient website.

 

Has anyone tried this other site?

 

lcandela123

thornyhold67

Link to comment

The other site is Waymarking.com It is part of the Groundspeak family of sites. Your password and user name work there just fine. Soon,when version II of the geocaching.com site is allowed to go live the sites will integrate even more closely.

I believe the tie between Waymarking and geocaching was severed a few months back... that might just be the profile pieces, though.

 

You can also try out the TerraCaching website (URL intentionally left out - PM me if you want it and can't find it). They allow virtuals and/or locationless caches. I know there are a few people that enjoy both sites... there are other sites out there, as well.

Link to comment

[quote name=lcandela123' date='Jul 8 2008, 03:37 PM' post='3549559'

Has anyone tried this other site?

 

:ph34r:Hi..... I went thru the thing when they stopped Virtuals / locationles.....posted my complaints / request etc.etc. Just recently I went over and checked out Waymarking. After poking around the site for a bit, getting a feel for what was going on.........

 

It's ok got me hooked any way............here in the desert southwest, caching comes to a dead stop during the sumer months. So with Waymarking I go out after my AM coffee, and check out possible marks.....glean all the pic's and info I need.........spend the afternoon at the keyboard researching / posting Some of the historical stuff gets a bit involved...........

 

Check It Out give it a real try...................... :P

Link to comment

Well one of the problems (not for me, but in general) is that webcams and virtuals found on Waymarking.com do not count as found caches anymore.

 

Consider the statistic cachers' emotions :) ...

The Waymarking stats are rather better than the geocaching ones. For the time being they're separate, so that's a problem that might bother some, but IMO it's a much better site for "virtual caching".

Link to comment

Is it a requirement that a new thread asking to bring back virtuals be posted every two weeks? :P

 

Is the frequency only 2 weeks? :P I have no problem with the "bring back virtual" thread starters, I wouldn't expect them (especially before their first post), to do exhaustive research on the subject. I've been around a long time, 5 years, and longer than over 90% of accounts, and the de-facto ban on virtuals, "The Wow factor" pre-dates me by a couple of months! (May or June 2003, it was).

 

If this action wasn't taken, geocaching would in no way resemble what it is today. There would be millions of them, and most of them lame beyond belief. A cache you could "place" with very little effort, and basically no maintenance required!! It would have gotten totally out of control. Now instead we have tens of thousands of film canisters under lampskirts. :(

 

So the answer was Waymarking. It sort of developed into a game with a cult following of Waymark creators, with practically no one ever visiting the Waymarks, but there you have it. It's a nice website, and this "cult following" does an outstanding job of writing these things up.

Link to comment

I'm looking forward to a time when:

  • Waymarks are part of the "Find Count."
  • PQ of waymarks are available.
  • Waymarking.com is easy to use.

If my theories hold true then when folks start getting smilies for waymarks and waymarks are easy to download to the GPS then the trache will slowly die off. So, instead of tucking a nano under a skirt at an Atlantic Bread Co. you simply add a category or waymark.

 

Conversely, I would more likely actually do some waymarks. Right now, the PITA factor is simply too high.

Link to comment

Is it a requirement that a new thread asking to bring back virtuals be posted every two weeks? :anitongue:

 

Is the frequency only 2 weeks? :laughing: I have no problem with the "bring back virtual" thread starters, I wouldn't expect them (especially before their first post), to do exhaustive research on the subject. I've been around a long time, 5 years, and longer than over 90% of accounts, and the de-facto ban on virtuals, "The Wow factor" pre-dates me by a couple of months! (May or June 2003, it was).

 

If this action wasn't taken, geocaching would in no way resemble what it is today. There would be millions of them, and most of them lame beyond belief. A cache you could "place" with very little effort, and basically no maintenance required!! It would have gotten totally out of control. Now instead we have tens of thousands of film canisters under lampskirts. :anicute:

 

So the answer was Waymarking. It sort of developed into a game with a cult following of Waymark creators, with practically no one ever visiting the Waymarks, but there you have it. It's a nice website, and this "cult following" does an outstanding job of writing these things up.

You're right about the lack of visits. I'm not sure people realize that option is there -- I didn't until the last week or so when I really started checking the site out. That's the aspect that most closely follows the Virtuals model.

 

Create a Category -> create a locationless cache

Create a Waypoint -> log a locationless cache / create a virtual cache

Visit a Waypoint -> find a virtual cache

 

I logged visits on seven just yesterday.

 

One thing I've realized, however, is that Waymarking is more photo-oriented. Most that I've seen want a photo as your proof of a visit (like locationless did), rather than gathering info from the site and sending it to the owner. That's totally fine by me -- I love the photo aspect and much prefer it over having to keep track of what I need to find out at each site. At the same time I can see where it might turn some people off. When I first started caching, I didn't have a digital camera, so I tended to avoid anything that required a photo.

Link to comment

I have been on the wayoutofmarking site, and only see issues... Yeah, there are similarities, but along the same lines, lets move for all Earthcaches to be listed on earthcacher.com and then they to be grandfathered here. Thats what happened to virtuals.

 

Or... we could get rid of this thread topic and just scrap the Waymarking thought and just re-enable the publishing of Virtuals. Its not like we're asking for a new cache type. We're just wanting a useful feature BACK!

 

The Steaks

Link to comment

All that is really necessary is to have the waymark stats appear on everyone's geocaching profile.

 

I'm looking forward to a time when:

  • Waymarks are part of the "Find Count."
  • PQ of waymarks are available.

 

I agree with that.

 

If my theories hold true then when folks start getting smilies for waymarks and waymarks are easy to download to the GPS then the trache will slowly die off. So, instead of tucking a nano under a skirt at an Atlantic Bread Co. you simply add a category or waymark.

 

I don't think that will happen though.

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
Link to comment

I have been on the wayoutofmarking site, and only see issues... Yeah, there are similarities, but along the same lines, lets move for all Earthcaches to be listed on earthcacher.com and then they to be grandfathered here. Thats what happened to virtuals.

 

Or... we could get rid of this thread topic and just scrap the Waymarking thought and just re-enable the publishing of Virtuals. Its not like we're asking for a new cache type. We're just wanting a useful feature BACK!

 

The Steaks

It's a bit more than a 'thought' now, so you're too late. :lol:

 

You say that Waymarking has "issues" so you'd still rather "bring back virtuals". How about these issues with your proposal...just a few off the top of my head;

 

You're wanting all those 117000 waymarks loading into geocaching.com too, and reformatting so they look like "caches"?

 

And the 740 categories as "locationless"? And you'll field all the complaints by people who just do Waymarking, or (like me) have got used to the interface and now prefer it to the geocaching one? Or are you proposing that everyone just loses all that work so that you don't have the inconvenience of learning a new interface?

 

The "wow" factor would no longer be a feasible filter, so any and all new virtuals would have to be accepted. No category owners in geocaching,so you'd probably just have to allow them without review. Some areas I've been to already have at least 10 times as many local waymarks as caches; would you really want caches being swamped like that?

 

And what about places where people could set caches but opt to make them virtual so they don't have to bother with permission and/or maintenance. Do you stop a physical cache at the same place, or allow both? If the latter, how do you show this on a map? What if the cacher sets up hundreds of them (a huge 'series' to boost numbers)?

 

The reason that the recurrent "bring back virtuals" thread is regarded as so pointless is that it clearly can't be done now, even if everyone wanted it.

Link to comment

Thanks for the view. Not sure why you think that virtual caches would be ignored, as the few we did seemed to be very popular. Was that the expereince a couple of years ago? You make a good general point that caches should be clever and fun, not lame. (I seem to be rooting through a lot of poison ivy lately.)

 

Anyway, there seems to be lots of geocachers here that definitely would like them back.

 

One person here suggested that the waymarks be listed on the other site, but that the stats appear here. Maybe that would work. Anyway, weekend is here almost, so have time to check out Waymarking.

 

thanks! :D

lcandela123

 

 

Is it a requirement that a new thread asking to bring back virtuals be posted every two weeks? :D

 

Is the frequency only 2 weeks? :lol: I have no problem with the "bring back virtual" thread starters, I wouldn't expect them (especially before their first post), to do exhaustive research on the subject. I've been around a long time, 5 years, and longer than over 90% of accounts, and the de-facto ban on virtuals, "The Wow factor" pre-dates me by a couple of months! (May or June 2003, it was).

 

If this action wasn't taken, geocaching would in no way resemble what it is today. There would be millions of them, and most of them lame beyond belief. A cache you could "place" with very little effort, and basically no maintenance required!! It would have gotten totally out of control. Now instead we have tens of thousands of film canisters under lampskirts. :D

 

So the answer was Waymarking. It sort of developed into a game with a cult following of Waymark creators, with practically no one ever visiting the Waymarks, but there you have it. It's a nice website, and this "cult following" does an outstanding job of writing these things up.

Link to comment

I have been on the wayoutofmarking site, and only see issues... Yeah, there are similarities, but along the same lines, lets move for all Earthcaches to be listed on earthcacher.com and then they to be grandfathered here. Thats what happened to virtuals.

 

Or... we could get rid of this thread topic and just scrap the Waymarking thought and just re-enable the publishing of Virtuals. Its not like we're asking for a new cache type. We're just wanting a useful feature BACK!

 

The Steaks

I'm curious what the issues are that you see. I see two: the photo thing that I've already mentioned, and lack of PQs. The latter is significant, but supposedly on its way.

 

If you want the Virtuals experience, searching works exactly the same as this one. You put in coordinates and ask for the closest ones. It even gives you categories, so you can ignore, say, Restaurants or Historical Markers or whatever you think makes for a lame virtual.

 

If you want the Locationless experience, it's far superior to how they worked here. Even better, there aren't arbitrary coordinates attached to them, so you don't have to scan the globe looking for categories. And the categories are what they are, not a clever name that only hints at the subject. And it's trivial to see if a spot has already been submitted to a category. That was very difficult with Locationless caches.

 

If stats really are important, then you need to look at how they're handled on wm.com, because they're much more a part of it. Little medal icons in your profile that light up when you reach certain numbers, and a huge blank grid that fills with icons for the waymark types you've done as you do them (like the type icons here, but better organized). Anyone who's a numbers cacher really ought to be all about Waymarking.

 

You get to rate waymarks, too. It's not one of the complicated, foolproof systems that are often discussed here, but it is there.

Link to comment

...The site directed me to another geocache site to list the virtual cache, but I haven't looked into it yet. Not sure how this works. Anyway, I like managing all my cache activities on geocaching.com, as it is an excellent and convenient website.

 

Has anyone tried this other site?

 

lcandela123

thornyhold67

 

If you are talking Terraching.com or Navicache.com they allow virtual caches and those are the same as the virtual caches that you have enjoyed. You will enjoy virtual caches listed on those sites as much as any you find listed on this site.

 

If they referred you to Waymarking, those are waymarks and not the same at all. Because of the differences you may, or may not like the waymark angle.

 

As for listing your virtual caches as virtual caches on the two other caching sites or as a waymark nowhere near as many finders will come your way as you would have gotten listing them on geocaching.com.

Link to comment

The cut-and-paste answer to the virtual question... straight from Jeremy

That post is over a year and a half old... which would seem to imply that features/ideas don't change over time (which, I'd think is a poor assumption). You can't fault folks for trying to get simple answers out of TPTB, even if slightly redundant or somewhat historical...

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...