Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
BigBadger & Li'l SG

Earthcaches and waymarks

Recommended Posts

I know this has been brought up before but I still don't get it.

 

There seem to be more and more rules about what to place (or not), where to place (or not), how to place (or not)... etc... yet gc.com still allows Earthcaches into the system of Geocaches. Why?

 

I cannot ask for emailed information from a finder of regular geocaches, yet Earthcaches require such action.

 

I must have a physical container for all types of geocaches, yet Earthcaches must NOT have a physical container.

 

Locationless caches actually had what appears to be everything a geocache needs yet have been moved to Waymarking, yet Earthcaches have not.

 

Webcam caches also have been moved to Waymarking but still have grandfathered caches operating on gc.com, yet earthcaches remain.

 

Look, I like Earthcaches and am not saying they need to be stopped. I just don't like duel sets of rules. Make things consistent throughout the system or don't have those particular rules. Simple.

 

By every definition Earthcaches are nothing more than Waymarks. Move them on over... oh yeah, and bring back locationless caches.

 

Don't bite my head off....

Share this post


Link to post

Earthcaches were originally moved to Waymarking but I'm guessing that the GSA wasn't pleased about that so they were moved back here.

 

Locationless caches had everything that geocaches need, except for a geocache and using a GPS and coordinates to find them.

 

As far as there being more and more rules, the guidelines haven't changed much in a few years, beyond some minor tweaking of the wording. The disallowing of ALRs is the only major recent change that I can think of right now.

Edited by briansnat

Share this post


Link to post

Geocaching is Groundspeak's game so they get to define what is a cache. Various categories of "caches" have changed over the years. Categories that are no longer allowed (except for locationless) have been grandfathered into the site, which is a a fair thing to do.

 

Earthcaches were originally developed in partnership with the GSA as part of Groundspeak's commitment to education. I believe that the National Park Service was also a part of this process. After Waymarking was launched, earthcaches were moved there (with existing caches grandfathered on this site). I don't know what kinds of discussions took place with the GSA, but I never thought earthcaches were a particularly good fit for the Waymarking site and I was glad when Groundspeak restored them in full as part of this game.

Edited by mulvaney

Share this post


Link to post

Geocaching is Groundspeak's game

 

This is the second time this week that I have seen that sentiment. It's wrong in my not so humble opinion.

 

Here's what I had to say last time:

 

It's their game

 

It's NOT their game. I don't see Groundspeak hiding caches for me to find in myyyy neighborhood.

 

Get it straight. This is OUR game. Groundspeak is just the biggest and the best and the most righteously awesome listing service and gentle director of the course of OUR game. :laughing:

 

Don't get me wrong. I count quite a few Lackeys among my personal friends, but without US, gc.com is a $6 a year domain.

 

Heck, I should just start a thread. Might take awhile to word it so it doesn't become an angst filled flame fest or look like I'm a hater for Groundspeak which I am most certainly not, but it's a complete misconception to believe that they own the verb "geocaching."

 

WE, you and I and every other participant own it. Geocaching only exists by the good graces of the next guy who is motivated to hide a cache for you (the royal you) to find.

Share this post


Link to post

It's NOT their game. I don't see Groundspeak hiding caches for me to find in myyyy neighborhood.

 

Get it straight. This is OUR game. Groundspeak is just the biggest and the best and the most righteously awesome listing service and gentle director of the course of OUR game. :laughing:

 

 

Your point is well taken, although as a listing service Groundspeak does get to decide what types of caches it lists, and under what conditions it will list them. As such, locationless caches were archived and redefined as waymarks. Earthcaches were established, moved, and then restored. New listings for webcam caches and virtuals were stopped, but some remain grandfathered into their listings.

 

There are other listing services - some of which continue to allow locationless or virtuals - but I can't recall the last time I navicached or terracached. So to be more accurate, I should have said that Groundspeak gets to define the types of caches they list on their service, just as they get to make any business decision that affects this web site. Indeed, since their listings are their primary business, Groundspeak has been very protective of that information - for understandable reasons - so they do not allow their listings to be used in certain ways or the site to be scraped by other servers.

 

I have argued about some of the choices they have made about their listings - and if it were MY game, some of these decisions may have been different - but I am glad that they have supported earthcaching and made it apart of their listings, which by and large define this particular game.

Edited by mulvaney

Share this post


Link to post

It's NOT their game. I don't see Groundspeak hiding caches for me to find in myyyy neighborhood.

 

Get it straight. This is OUR game. Groundspeak is just the biggest and the best and the most righteously awesome listing service and gentle director of the course of OUR game. :laughing:

 

 

Your point is well taken, although as a listing service Groundspeak does get to decide what types of caches it lists, and under what conditions it will list them. There are other listing services, but I can't recall the last time I navicached or terracached. So to be more accurate, I should have said that Groundspeak gets to define the types of caches they list on their service. I have argued about some of the decisions they have made about their listings - and if it were MY game, some of these decisions may have been different - but I am glad that they have supported earthcaching and made it apart of their listings, which by and large define this particular game.

 

I agreed with the rest of your post, just not the sentiment.

 

I LOVE Earthcaches. They are way cool in my book.

 

I'd Waymark if it wasn't aside from geocaching. Terracaching has pretty much proved to me that geocachers are one stop shoppers for the most part and all waymarks are is a virt by another name. It would just need to be ON the stat page like benchmarks to get more interest from me.

Share this post


Link to post

Earthcaches have been part of geocaching longer then most players, including the OP. Same with virtuals and locationless.

 

The earliest definition of "geocaching" included these cache types, so why exactly are people spouting "This isn't geocaching!" when it clearly is?

 

It's kind of like getting kicked out of a club that you yourself started, and being told you aren't in the spirit of the society.

 

If you dont like virtuals, earthcaches, micros - filter them. But to move them to another site because it doesn't meet your particular definition of purity - that is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post

If you dont like virtuals, earthcaches, micros - filter them. But to move them to another site because it doesn't meet your particular definition of purity - that is wrong.

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post

I tend to agree with the OP that Waymarking would seem to be the better fit for EarthCaches.

 

The definition of a Waymarking category seem to almost have been custom made to fit EarthCache. Categories are managed by group (EarthCache.org). The group defines the guidelines for listing waymarks in the category as well as guidelines for logging visits to these waymarks. The group officers (GeoAware and the other EarthCache reviewers) review the waymarks submitted to the category. Categories can have addition fields defined (EarthCache type).

 

As stated before, EarthCaches were listed on Waymarking when it first came out, with plans to migrate the existing EarthCaches from Geocaching.com. However, EarthCachers rebeled and demanded that EarthCaches remain on Geocaching.com. The biggest issue seemed to be that EarthCaches listed on Waymarking.com were getting fewer visits. In part this was because Waymarking was new and not every one had discovered it, but also because geocachers only got a smiley for EarthCaches listed on Geoaching.com. When the EarthCache program was started, EarthCache.org got Groundspeak to agree to list these on Geocaching.com. Groundspeak likely agreed to keep EarthCaches on Geocaching.com because of this prior agreement.

 

Those who say that EarthCaches are a better fit to Geocaching than Waymarking are probably judging Waymarking by a few categories. The look at Waymarking and see the McDonalds category and immediately judge Waymarking to be lame. If they would look farther they would find many interesting, clever, and fun categories listed on Waymarking. There are historic places to visit, there are benchmarks and survey markers in many countries, there are opportunities to find the spot where Ansel Adams took a photgraph and to try to recreat the shot yourself, the are secret locations that you would not likely find otherwise. Creativity in defining Waymarking categories is not limited because some people are Waymarking McDonald's or Starbucks. A great diservice was done to Waymarking when EarthCache.org abandoned it. It could have been the first of a series of Waymarking categories that emphasize some educational experience for the visitor. I see where Groundspeak has created an area they call Waymarking University and I can only guess that they have plans to develop some new categories along these lines.

Share this post


Link to post

In part this was because Waymarking was new and not every one had discovered it, but also because geocachers only got a smiley for EarthCaches listed on Geoaching.com.

 

Oh, not this garbage again.

 

Pocket queries. Pocket queries. Pocket queries.

Share this post


Link to post

Its all about the "Smiley" man. :laughing:

 

I like to see stats. It gives me the big warm fuzzy feeling when I see what I accomplished.

 

Both Waymarks and Earthcaches take you places you may not otherwise know about. I have seen more new things these last couple months due to Geocaching, then I would have ever found on my own. I love the earthcache idea as they are intresting and I really dig some of the waymarks. If it comes down to me searching out a EC or a WM, it will be a EC because I can get my "Smiley". Link the WM somehow and I'm in.

Edited by Dorothy_&_Tin_Man

Share this post


Link to post

In part this was because Waymarking was new and not every one had discovered it, but also because geocachers only got a smiley for EarthCaches listed on Geoaching.com.

 

Oh, not this garbage again.

 

Pocket queries. Pocket queries. Pocket queries.

 

:laughing: Did I miss something here? What does PQ's have to do with EC or WM's?

Share this post


Link to post

In part this was because Waymarking was new and not every one had discovered it, but also because geocachers only got a smiley for EarthCaches listed on Geoaching.com.

 

Oh, not this garbage again.

 

Pocket queries. Pocket queries. Pocket queries.

 

:laughing: Did I miss something here? What does PQ's have to do with EC or WM's?

Share this post


Link to post

In part this was because Waymarking was new and not every one had discovered it, but also because geocachers only got a smiley for EarthCaches listed on Geoaching.com.

 

Oh, not this garbage again.

 

Pocket queries. Pocket queries. Pocket queries.

 

:laughing: Did I miss something here? What does PQ's have to do with EC or WM's?

PQ will let you search for Earthcaches.

However PQs don't exist for Waymarking- it would help so much if WM's could use PQs.

Share this post


Link to post

Its all about the "Smiley" man. :laughing:

 

I like to see stats. It gives me the big warm fuzzy feeling when I see what I accomplished.

 

Both Waymarks and Earthcaches take you places you may not otherwise know about. I have seen more new things these last couple months due to Geocaching, then I would have ever found on my own. I love the earthcache idea as they are intresting and I really dig some of the waymarks. If it comes down to me searching out a EC or a WM, it will be a EC because I can get my "Smiley". Link the WM somehow and I'm in.

 

I'm the other side of the same coin. If the EC didn't add in like benchmarks don't, I'd still do 'em. I'm all for keeping my smiley average to around 100 per year, but I blew that average by blasting 180+ last month on my 8.6k+ mile trip to and from GW8.

 

What I don't like is having to enter a different system to have the same fun I can have here. I plain don't like the way WM works. This system is better IMO.

Share this post


Link to post

In part this was because Waymarking was new and not every one had discovered it, but also because geocachers only got a smiley for EarthCaches listed on Geoaching.com.

 

Oh, not this garbage again.

 

Pocket queries. Pocket queries. Pocket queries.

 

:laughing: Did I miss something here? What does PQ's have to do with EC or WM's?

PQ will let you search for Earthcaches.

However PQs don't exist for Waymarking- it would help so much if WM's could use PQs.

 

Gotcha. Still doesnt earn me a "smiley". :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

 

:laughing: Did I miss something here? What does PQ's have to do with EC or WM's?

PQ will let you search for Earthcaches.

However PQs don't exist for Waymarking- it would help so much if WM's could use PQs.

 

Gotcha. Still doesnt earn me a "smiley". :laughing:

EC's do. WM's don't.

Share this post


Link to post

Gotcha. Still doesnt earn me a "smiley". :laughing:

 

It's truly unfortunate that some cachers insist on adding extraneous value to a system simply meant to keep a record of caches found.

 

It's doubly unfortunate that it's assumed that this attitude is shared by all cachers who don't use Waymarking.com, when, in fact, Waymarking.com has many, many strikes against it beyond the lack of a "smiley" for Waymarks found.

 

That being said, I'm certain that Waymarking.com would see a dramatic increase in traffic if Waymarks could be added to pocket queries, and if there was a central Groundspeak account feature that showed geocaches AND waymarks found.

Share this post


Link to post

 

It's kind of like getting kicked out of a club that you yourself started, and being told you aren't in the spirit of the society.

 

Like mens clubs, etc...... Is that what you mean?

 

 

If you dont like virtuals, earthcaches, micros - filter them. But to move them to another site because it doesn't meet your particular definition of purity - that is wrong.

 

Never said I don't like them...... And what about my point about locationless, vitrtuals, webcams????? They were all stopped and moved. And to exemplify your point, I DO filter out what I don't want to do, can't fit in my GPS, am not in the area for, etc, etc, etc.

 

My point is why have rules if only some rules have to be followed by only some caches/cachers. It's ridiculous..... Waymarking on the other hand is completely valid. There is a lot of really cool stuff on Waymarking. Earthcaching would bolster Waymarking's validity greatly by being a part of it.

 

.

Share this post


Link to post

Gotcha. Still doesnt earn me a "smiley". :laughing:

 

It's truly unfortunate that some cachers insist on adding extraneous value to a system simply meant to keep a record of caches found.

 

It's doubly unfortunate that it's assumed that this attitude is shared by all cachers who don't use Waymarking.com, when, in fact, Waymarking.com has many, many strikes against it beyond the lack of a "smiley" for Waymarks found.

 

That being said, I'm certain that Waymarking.com would see a dramatic increase in traffic if Waymarks could be added to pocket queries, and if there was a central Groundspeak account feature that showed geocaches AND waymarks found.

 

Well said!!

Share this post


Link to post

 

My point is why have rules if only some rules have to be followed by only some caches/cachers. It's ridiculous..... Waymarking on the other hand is completely valid. There is a lot of really cool stuff on Waymarking. Earthcaching would bolster Waymarking's validity greatly by being a part of it.

 

 

I don't see it as a matter of rules that are applied inconsistently. You have certain types of caches that are defined differently, as Groundspeak can certainly do. Although Jeremy decided that locationless caches and webcams were better defined as part of Waymarking, it does not mean that earthcaches should be moved back to that particular site.

 

Leaving whatever politics (if any) there were between the GSA and Groundspeak aside, when earthcaches were part of Waymarking, the earthcaching tasks and their type of focus did not make it a particularly good fit. The earthcaches were distinct from waymarks. Although earthcaches are also distinct from the "traditional" type of caches, they are in keeping with many of the things that have long defined caching. They were able to compensate for some of the problems associated with virtuals by providing a specific educational focus, tasks, and a separate approval process. In a sense, they got virtuals "right" without having to rely on wow-factors that caused so much problems here.

 

To my mind, they are a good fit within the present site. They certainly have made my experience in this game far richer than it would have otherwise been.

 

Another post talks about an added Waymarking category (Waymarking University). I don't multitask that well so Waymarking will not hold my interest unless it is integrated within this site. Perhaps it would be easier if Groundspeak developed a Waymarking app to compete with Gowalla so that different gadgets could be used for different experiences, but I would not take earthcaching away from this site (again) to bolster Waymarking's validity. I would miss them, just as I would miss them if the GSA moved them to an alternative listing service to bolster the validity of that site.

Edited by mulvaney

Share this post


Link to post

Earthcaches were originally moved to Waymarking but I'm guessing that the GSA wasn't pleased about that so they were moved back here.

 

Earthcaches were originally developed in partnership with the GSA as part of Groundspeak's commitment to education.

 

Leaving whatever politics (if any) there were between the GSA and Groundspeak aside,

 

I didn't know they did more than sell cookies and earn merit badges.

Share this post


Link to post

Earthcaches were originally moved to Waymarking but I'm guessing that the GSA wasn't pleased about that so they were moved back here.

 

Earthcaches were originally developed in partnership with the GSA as part of Groundspeak's commitment to education.

 

Leaving whatever politics (if any) there were between the GSA and Groundspeak aside,

 

I didn't know they did more than sell cookies and earn merit badges.

 

Good point. Although both the Scouts and the geological GSA offer their own separate merit badges (called earthcache masters on our site), I would not bite into any of the cookies sold by the geological GSA. They might be a bit rocky.

Edited by mulvaney

Share this post


Link to post

... when earthcaches were part of Waymarking, the earthcaching tasks and their type of focus did not make it a particularly good fit. The earthcaches were distinct from waymarks. Although earthcaches are also distinct from the "traditional" type of caches, they are in keeping with many of the things that have long defined caching. They were able to compensate for some of the problems associated with virtuals by providing a specific educational focus, tasks, and a separate approval process. In a sense, they got virtuals "right" without having to rely on wow-factors that caused so much problems here.

 

To my mind, they are a good fit within the present site. They certainly have made my experience in this game far richer than it would have otherwise been.

I can understand the complaint that Waymarking is a different site so it is hard to combine searching for caches with other activities you might enjoy when using your GPS. Narcissa complaint about Pockets Queries shows that some geocachers got used to visiting vitual caches an EarthCaches simply because they showed up in the pocet query with the physical geocaches. If I was in an area looking for geocaches, the nearby virtuals, webcams, and EarthCaches would all show up. Might as well stop and see what is there (and, oh yeah, get the smiley for doing so). So when they are on a different site and there is no covenient way to get the coordinate and descriptions loaded on a GPS, some people will just not do them.

 

What I don't understand it saying that EarthCaches are somehow entirely different than waymarks and in some abstract way much closer to geocaching. Waymarking is not simply listing all the McDonald's restaurants in the world, or listing the state historic markers for some state. Sure, ther are many categories that exist primarily for the purpose of making lists. But there are plenty that have more specific tasks in mind. Best Kept Secrets requires a verification of visits much like virtual caches do. Other categories also have verification requirements, or ask visitors to perform some specific task like taking a photo from the same spot as a famous photograph. There is nothing in Waymarking that says a specific educational focus cannot be made part a category. Had EarthCaches moved to Waymarking, it would be so much easier to convince people that Waymarking is much more that just listing locations. I'm hopeful that the Waymarking University idea will do that job now. Waymarking, not geocaching, is where there is the greatest opportunity to innovate withe new GPS based activities including using GPS based activities to provide an educational experience.

Share this post


Link to post

Hey, if all I need to do to get another smiley is stand beside a big rock and have my picture taken holding my GPSr, count me in!

Share this post


Link to post

Hey, if all I need to do to get another smiley is stand beside a big rock and have my picture taken holding my GPSr, count me in!

 

What gave you that impression?

Share this post


Link to post

I am moving this thread from the Geocaching forum to the Waymarking Earthcaching forum. :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

Narcissa complaint about Pockets Queries shows that some geocachers got used to visiting vitual caches an EarthCaches simply because they showed up in the pocet query with the physical geocaches.

 

I visit virtual geocaches and Earthcaches because they're interesting AND easy to get into my GPS. I was one of the first people in my area to earn the Platinum Earthcache Master badge, because I *really* like Earthcaches. Your insinuation that I just grab them for another smiley because they happen to be on my GPS is inaccurate and offensive. When I visit new places, virtual geocaches and Earthcaches are often the *only* caches I go to, because I know they'll bring me to interesting things. If I could include selected Waymarking categories in my PQs, that would be sweet, particularly when I'm travelling.

 

People who like Earthcaches, not to mention the society that sponsors the Earthcaching program, don't want to see Earthcaches get relegated to Waymarking because nobody would visit them. It's a program designed to educate people by getting them to these sites.

 

Right now, given the larger aims of the progam, Geocaching.com is the best place for Earthcaches simply because of the numbers. Geocaching.com is massively popular, so Earthcaches get seen by lots and lots of people. That - not some ridiculous puritan idea about what constitutes a "real" geocache - is what is at stake here.

 

Just a note: many avid Waymarkers OPENLY ADMIT that they use the site to keep track of sites for their own use, and are not interested in encouraging visits. I really don't see the appeal in creating an exhaustive taxonomy of every object within a 100 mile radius of my house, particularly if I'm not even going to try to share it with others, but that seems to be what the five people who use the site are doing with Waymarking, and Groundspeak doesn't seem too interested in changing/improving it.

Edited by narcissa

Share this post


Link to post

Hmmmm. So far, all I have seen is that Earthcaches are NOT any different than any other WAYMARK. BUT that because Waymarking site is different than GC.com and not easy to get the Earthcaches into our GPSr's many of you just simply do not want to lose the ability to PQ them with everything else..... Right? Smiley or not.

 

Well I agree with all of that with the exception that I did not want to lose Webcams ( I think they are great fun to try to organize and log), nor did I want to lose Locationless, which because I started later, will never have the opportunity to get a smiley for (yes, I like to see my count go up).

 

Earthcaches are simply Waymarks, no question about it. A cache is something/stuff/box/ left behind for others to find. A cave or a rock striation was not left there by you or I or anyone else... in fact a Mcdonalds restaurant actually was built and left by humans so it has much more reason to be a cache than a super cool rock.

 

I never did argue that Earthcaches are bad or wrong or anything other than a positive experience, and I still do not. What I am getting at is that Earthcaches are Waymarks and if there is to be any separation of the 2 then they belong over in the Waymark website............ AND......... that the Waymark website really should be more like the GC.com website with smiley's a common count/score for all to see and NOT separate except for how it should list, organize and retrieve PQ's.

 

By the way, It's a shame when threads are pushed aside, I mean moved to another more appropriate forum area. It basically kills the thread to anyone new seeing the conversation. I did think long and hard about where to post this and thought that the 2 most likely forums were the Website and the General.... Oh, well.

Share this post


Link to post

LOL :blink:

 

Yeah, it really bugs me too when the Moderators move threads to the appropriate Subforum. I mean, who do the think they are anyway :laughing:

 

In the interest of keeping you thread alive, since it seems important to you, perhaps you could find an agency or organization that could champion your cause, take the idea to Groundspeak to return Webcam caches to GC by convincing them how educational they are and how it fits within the general overall mission of the site to promote these *unique* locations. Or you could even start an organization of your own? Maybe something like The Webcamilogical Society of Amerca ? :wacko:

Edited by Touchstone

Share this post


Link to post

LOL :blink:

 

Yeah, it really bugs me too when the Moderators move threads to the appropriate Subforum. I mean, who do the think they are anyway :laughing:

 

In the interest of keeping you thread alive, since it seems important to you, perhaps you could find an agency or organization that could champion your cause, take the idea to Groundspeak to return Webcam caches to GC by convincing them how educational they are and how it fits within the general overall mission of the site to promote these *unique* locations. Or you could even start an organization of your own? Maybe something like The Webcamilogical Society of Amerca ? :wacko:

 

Well said Touchtone!

But, there is another organization to be considered beside WSA.

Most of you are too young to remember Al Capp and his daily cartoon called Little Abner. Every once in a while he referred to a fictitious group called S.W.I.N.E. which stood for Students Wildly Indignant about Nearly Everything. His point........if you want to, you can be indignant about the most silly of reasons that you may choose. No body here belongs to this fictitious group, but are indignant about nothing!

 

Earthcaches Rock or at least some of them are Rock! :blink:

Share this post


Link to post

I never did argue that Earthcaches are bad or wrong or anything other than a positive experience, and I still do not. What I am getting at is that Earthcaches are Waymarks and if there is to be any separation of the 2 then they belong over in the Waymark website............ AND......... that the Waymark website really should be more like the GC.com website with smiley's a common count/score for all to see and NOT separate except for how it should list, organize and retrieve PQ's.

 

By the way, It's a shame when threads are pushed aside, I mean moved to another more appropriate forum area. It basically kills the thread to anyone new seeing the conversation. I did think long and hard about where to post this and thought that the 2 most likely forums were the Website and the General.... Oh, well.

 

Waymarking has been a massive fail from the start. Yes, they should have moved all non-container caches over. They should have designed the Waymarking site better. Earthcaches are still at Geocaching.com, and pre-existing virtual geocaches and webcams got grandfathered in. Benchmarks are still at Geocaching.com too. It doesn't make much sense.

 

There are factors to consider beyond personal definitions of geocache. Really, Waymark vs. Geocache is a false dichotomy that wouldn't even exist if Groundspeak hadn't launched that other site that nobody uses.

 

The Earthcaching project is sponsored by an outside party, and they would be well within their rights to just yank their support if the program was relegated to a different website - particularly a website with substantially less traffic than the original.

 

This thread was not pushed aside, it was moved to the appropriate section of the forum. If people in the other forums aren't interested in topics posted here, oh well - you can't just post threads wherever you feel they'll get the most traffic.

 

BTW - look up the word "cache" in a good etymology dictionary.

Share this post


Link to post

Earthcaches are simply Waymarks, no question about it.

 

Caches with a container can be thought as waymarks as well - their common property is that a hidden container is hidden there. So it is just a matter of definition ..............

 

A cache is something/stuff/box/ left behind for others to find.

 

First, there is no definition of a cache that everyone will agree with.

Second, the more important something for me is the experience - the person who sets up a cache in the ideal situation invests his time and effort to leave me a unique experience.

Third, there are typically no boxes left for others to find at events.

Earthcaches fit mucb better my personal concept of a cache than most event caches or citos.

 

that the Waymark website really should be more like the GC.com website with smiley's a common count/score for all to see and NOT separate except for how it should list, organize and retrieve PQ's.

 

I still would not like that much to select a few gems from so much what is worthless for me. In the case of Waymarking there are so many categories which are just there to categorize things and for collecting all sorts of waypoints and only a minority of them have in mind what turns a visit into a nice experience for me. As I prefer to search by coordinates, they would need an extremely nice and intelligent system for selection in order to make Waymarking attractive for me. As even the selection system which is available for caches (a much easier task) is not very intellegent, I doubt that Waymarking ever will become attractive to me.

 

 

Cezanne

Share this post


Link to post
..Waymarking on the other hand is completely valid. There is a lot of really cool stuff on Waymarking. Earthcaching would bolster Waymarking's validity greatly by being a part of it..

 

Earthcaches were moved to Waymarking for a while. I had a few "Earthmarks" on there. Sat there for a year or so without any visitors (like 90% of my waymarks). Groundspeak tried it - and I am sure GSA did not like being thrown to a site that got no traffic and threatened legal action.

 

So - Earthmarking did NOT bolster waymarkings validity. The only thing that Waymarking has done for the geocaching community is divide and confuse players.

 

So... Do tell. How much do you waymark?

http://www.Waymarking.com/images/stats.asp...68-b221e7c44116

Edited by Juicepig

Share this post


Link to post

.......... I had a few "Earthmarks" on there. Sat there for a year or so without any visitors (like 90% of my waymarks). Groundspeak tried it - and I am sure GSA did not like being thrown to a site that got no traffic and threatened legal action.

 

So - Earthmarking did NOT bolster waymarkings validity. The only thing that Waymarking has done for the geocaching community is divide and confuse players.

 

So... Do tell. How much do you waymark?

http://www.Waymarking.com/images/stats.asp...68-b221e7c44116

 

Cute... but also accurate. I tried Waymarking with some friends, meh... all they did was make new waymarks, of unique manhole covers, how exciting :blink:;) ......Gave the website a try and got so bogged down trying to find something worth going to that I bailed and went looking for ammo boxes in parks that had cool trails that I had never been to.

 

So, you point if I were to extrapolate is that Waymarking is less than successful...... so maybe Webcams, etc. should have just been left alone on gc.com?

Share this post


Link to post

 

Cute... but also accurate. I tried Waymarking with some friends, meh... all they did was make new waymarks, of unique manhole covers, how exciting :blink:;) ......Gave the website a try and got so bogged down trying to find something worth going to that I bailed and went looking for ammo boxes in parks that had cool trails that I had never been to.

 

So, you point if I were to extrapolate is that Waymarking is less than successful...... so maybe Webcams, etc. should have just been left alone on gc.com?

 

If they continued to let us create new virtual geocaches, webcams, and locationless caches on Geocaching.com, they couldn't use that as leverage to to force entice us to the new site.

Share this post


Link to post

.......... I had a few "Earthmarks" on there. Sat there for a year or so without any visitors (like 90% of my waymarks). Groundspeak tried it - and I am sure GSA did not like being thrown to a site that got no traffic and threatened legal action.

 

So - Earthmarking did NOT bolster waymarkings validity. The only thing that Waymarking has done for the geocaching community is divide and confuse players.

 

So... Do tell. How much do you waymark?

http://www.Waymarking.com/images/stats.asp...68-b221e7c44116

 

Cute... but also accurate. I tried Waymarking with some friends, meh... all they did was make new waymarks, of unique manhole covers, how exciting :blink:;) ......Gave the website a try and got so bogged down trying to find something worth going to that I bailed and went looking for ammo boxes in parks that had cool trails that I had never been to.

 

So, you point if I were to extrapolate is that Waymarking is less than successful...... so maybe Webcams, etc. should have just been left alone on gc.com?

 

I'm with you.

They should have been left on GC.com. I don't want to be narcissistic about it, but we love virtuals and web cam caches! :)

Share this post


Link to post

Geocaching.com is my one-stop for all site. If it's here, I'll hunt it. If I have to go somewhere else, I won't. I love benchmarking! Over 800 logs there, and no smileys! But if it were somewhere else, I wouldn't bother. I enjoy EarthCaches. But if they were somewhere else, I wouldn't bother. I enjoy Virtuals and Webcam caches, and think that new ones should be permitted. My webcam cache is one of my most popular caches, but if it were moved to Whymarking, I'd archive it. Whymarking is a dismal failure, and TPTB should finally realize that.

So. I am happy that EarthCaches have remained on Geocaching.com!

Share this post


Link to post

Geocaching.com is my one-stop for all site. If it's here, I'll hunt it. If I have to go somewhere else, I won't. I love benchmarking! Over 800 logs there, and no smileys! But if it were somewhere else, I wouldn't bother. I enjoy EarthCaches. But if they were somewhere else, I wouldn't bother. I enjoy Virtuals and Webcam caches, and think that new ones should be permitted. My webcam cache is one of my most popular caches, but if it were moved to Whymarking, I'd archive it. Whymarking is a dismal failure, and TPTB should finally realize that.

So. I am happy that EarthCaches have remained on Geocaching.com!

Go Mr. Dolphin! We are with you.

We have a few benchmarks and I'll have to admit, they are fun to hunt, but we haven't a whole lot of luck. We only wish we would have developed a webcam cache before they went belly up. Also, if ECs were moved to Waymarking, we would archive all!

How's your buddy? Remember................that totally inhuman caching partner of yours? lol.

Edited by Konnarock Kid & Marge

Share this post


Link to post

"If you dont like virtuals, earthcaches, micros - filter them. But to move them to another site because it doesn't meet your particular definition of purity - that is wrong."

 

why is there a different set of rules for earthcaches un :lol: der the geocaching system?

 

why can earthcaches require emails when others can't? why do they want to be included in the system, but not included in the rules?

Share this post


Link to post

"If you dont like virtuals, earthcaches, micros - filter them. But to move them to another site because it doesn't meet your particular definition of purity - that is wrong."

 

why is there a different set of rules for earthcaches un :lol: der the geocaching system?

 

why can earthcaches require emails when others can't? why do they want to be included in the system, but not included in the rules?

 

Earthcaches don't have a logbook, for starters.

 

I don't think Earthcaches want anything. They're not sentient beings.

Share this post


Link to post

"If you dont like virtuals, earthcaches, micros - filter them. But to move them to another site because it doesn't meet your particular definition of purity - that is wrong."

 

why is there a different set of rules for earthcaches un :unsure: der the geocaching system?

 

why can earthcaches require emails when others can't? why do they want to be included in the system, but not included in the rules?

Hi folks,

You have asked a legitimate question and deserve an answer and not a rude retort!

The main reason that earthcaches have some different rules is because they are different and don't fit into the usual categories. Admittedly, ECs are very close to virtual caches, but virtuals have been moved to the Waymarking site. Most of us miss them (virtuals), but alas, they are gone.

Speaking of virtuals, even the grandfathered virtuals can require answers to be emailed.

Now with ECs, other than the vacation and proximity rules, most of the other guidelines apply. Some might say that ECs are a kind of ALR (additional logging requirement) cache and they would be right, but that ALR rule doesn't apply either.

I guess the best answer to your question is ECs don't have a box to find and require an educational experience (from the Geological Society) i.e. the questions and absent the physical log to sign different guidelines have been adopted. Thanks. :(

Share this post


Link to post

 

You have asked a legitimate question and deserve an answer and not a rude retort!

 

 

Unfortunately I've come to expect it from at least 20% of responses to my posts... mostly because the topics tend to be a bit more controversial which ultimately brings the conniption up in some folks. C'est la vie......

Share this post


Link to post

 

You have asked a legitimate question and deserve an answer and not a rude retort!

 

 

Unfortunately I've come to expect it from at least 20% of responses to my posts... mostly because the topics tend to be a bit more controversial which ultimately brings the conniption up in some folks. C'est la vie......

 

You keep right on asking your questions. After all, this is America and we promote free speech and don't take a narcissistic approach to our fellow man! Some only promote them selves, not dialogue! Even though your questions may seem a bit controversial they are legit and deserve a respectful response! :yikes:

Share this post


Link to post

 

You keep right on asking your questions. After all, this is America and we promote free speech and don't take a narcissistic approach to our fellow man! Some only promote them selves, not dialogue! Even though your questions may seem a bit controversial they are legit and deserve a respectful response! :yikes:

 

1. The internet isn't "America."

 

2. Please cite examples of narcissism and self-promotion, with quotations, so that we can all see what you mean. I'm sure we'd all like to strive for the sort of "respect" that you claim to promote. I'd also like to know how you reconcile swearing and personal attacks with this supposed "respect."

Share this post


Link to post

 

You keep right on asking your questions. After all, this is America and we promote free speech and don't take a narcissistic approach to our fellow man! Some only promote them selves, not dialogue! Even though your questions may seem a bit controversial they are legit and deserve a respectful response! :yikes:

 

1. The internet isn't "America."

 

2. Please cite examples of narcissism and self-promotion, with quotations, so that we can all see what you mean. I'm sure we'd all like to strive for the sort of "respect" that you claim to promote. I'd also like to know how you reconcile swearing and personal attacks with this supposed "respect."

 

First of all, the cacher who's post you want to trash is a fellow American and I simply wanted, regardless of your snide remark, to remind him of his free speech rights. Yes, I'll grant you that you are communicating via the internet and yes, even here you have the free speech right to insult others! Admittedly, free speech rights are not limited to America. Frankly, that's one of the nicer things about these forums only you carry that right much too far!

I have never "attacked " you initially and have only answered your narcissistic utterings usually after you have attempted to show your great reservoir of knowledge by putting down some fellow cacher! It seems like you think you are casting pearls before swine!

You mentioned swearing. Come on, do you even know what that means or are you so isolated that a common saying as "not giving a rat's a__" would qualify as swearing? I certainly have more respect for my fellow cachers by not using what are commonly referred as swear words! Referring to an anatomical region of a rat isn't exactly swearing. Is this your puritanical standards or another way for you to demonstrate your felt superiority?

Self promotion? Just look at your own words and references to your blog! Both occur every time you attempt to put yourself above a responder or someone who initiates a question. Yep, the more posts you have, the more free advertising you have for the blog. Now if that isn't self promotion, I am willing to accept an alternative definition.

Let's begin with this quote, "I don't think Earthcaches want anything. They're not sentient beings!" This was your response to an honestly asked question! Is that not a put down? If not, I'll accept another definition for that also. If you would like additional quotes which demonstrate your utter lack of regard for others, I'll be happy to comply!

Thanks and have a much better day! :D

Share this post


Link to post

I have listings on the Waymarking site, and I am a Bronze level EarthCache Master, working on my Platinum level. I am not sure how Waymarking works in other areas, but here we have photos of Resturants, Bait Shops, Places that sell Beer, Golf Corse signs, Phone booths, and one BIG airplane hanger Church, just IMHO, plain lame stuff. The EarthCaches we have, which are few, include places like Stone Face, which is a natural rock formation that looks like a face. Then there is the Indian Mound in Ely, the Natural Bridge that the Daniel Boone Wilderness Trail crossed on the way to the Cumberland Gap. Sand Cave, Skylight Cave, Gap Cave, White Rocks, Many EC's that involve springs, EARTH related things. I list old TVA and GSA benchmarkers on Waymarking just because there is no place else to list them and they are old, and I feel that their location needs recorded. Just no way to compare the two sites unless you state it blountly, Waymarking is lame and EarthCaching is educational. Sure, some EC's are lame too, just not the ones that we have in our little corner of America. :yikes:

Edited by Manville Possum Hunters

Share this post


Link to post

First of all, the cacher who's post you want to trash is a fellow American and I simply wanted, regardless of your snide remark, to remind him of his free speech rights. Yes, I'll grant you that you are communicating via the internet and yes, even here you have the free speech right to insult others! Admittedly, free speech rights are not limited to America. Frankly, that's one of the nicer things about these forums only you carry that right much too far!

I have never "attacked " you initially and have only answered your narcissistic utterings usually after you have attempted to show your great reservoir of knowledge by putting down some fellow cacher! It seems like you think you are casting pearls before swine!

You mentioned swearing. Come on, do you even know what that means or are you so isolated that a common saying as "not giving a rat's a__" would qualify as swearing? I certainly have more respect for my fellow cachers by not using what are commonly referred as swear words! Referring to an anatomical region of a rat isn't exactly swearing. Is this your puritanical standards or another way for you to demonstrate your felt superiority?

Self promotion? Just look at your own words and references to your blog! Both occur every time you attempt to put yourself above a responder or someone who initiates a question. Yep, the more posts you have, the more free advertising you have for the blog. Now if that isn't self promotion, I am willing to accept an alternative definition.

Let's begin with this quote, "I don't think Earthcaches want anything. They're not sentient beings!" This was your response to an honestly asked question! Is that not a put down? If not, I'll accept another definition for that also. If you would like additional quotes which demonstrate your utter lack of regard for others, I'll be happy to comply!

 

So, you're a protector of "free speech" insofar as that speech is pleasing to you. Thank you for your candid disclosure.

 

I'm not sure why you've chosen to make our respective countries an issue. This is a privately-operated internet site, where comments and posts are subject to the rules imposed by the owners.

 

You keep bringing up "respect," yet when you're confronted with any kind of disagreement (or when you assume disagreement because you didn't understand the comment), you fly off the handle. It's really a shame, because I can tell from your other comments that you'd really like others to see you as a voice of reason.

 

It's unfortunate that you see these discussions as a contest of "superiority." They aren't. It's also unfortunate if disagreement causes you to feel inferior, but it's irrational to blame your lack of confidence on others.

 

It's funny how when I disagree with you (or when you think I'm disagreeing with you), I'm allegedly trying to impose my superiority on everyone else, but when I agree with you, you're suddenly all candy and roses toward me. I think you really need to evaluate why you take disagreement so personally.

 

Aside from my signature, you haven't been able to produce any examples to support your perceptions. I didn't ask you for examples of me being snarky - I can certainly come up with better examples than you did - I asked for examples of this supposed "self-promotion" and "narcissism" that you have been complaining about. Does it really come down to my signature? Many geocachers use this forum to promote their blogs. It seems bizarre that all of your complaints about me boil down to a URL in tiny writing.

 

My comment about Earthcaches not being sentient beings was snarky, but pretty mild given the tenor of this forum as a whole. It was also made well after you began this ridiculous little campaign against me. It was obvious to me that the person asking that question was not, in fact, asking it with sincerity. It was worded in an inflammatory way, and had already been answered within the very same post. I find it strange that you're so willing to entertain obvious attempts at trolling when you pushed so hard to get a moderator assigned to this forum. Perhaps you're not good at detecting tone. That would certainly explain much of your behaviour.

 

Look, I'm sympathetic to the fact that you're not the most articulate and educated person on this forum, but your education and vocabulary needn't determine your participation. You're easily intimidated when your comments are challenged in any way - you don't need to be. You have valuable contributions to make to these discussions, but it's sad that instead of using these discussions as an opportunity to learn and grow, you choose to fall apart and attack. If your self-confidence is so easily shaken, perhaps that requires personal reflection.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

×
×
  • Create New...