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

Earthcaches and waymarks

Recommended Posts

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:

 

This is a good point. While I'm sure Waymarking has many interesting places marked on it, it requires a great deal of work to figure out where they are. Just learning how to use the Waymarking site is a considerable hurdle for many (myself included - my head hurt every time I look at it). The good things easily get lost on there.

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:

 

This is a good point. While I'm sure Waymarking has many interesting places marked on it, it requires a great deal of work to figure out where they are. Just learning how to use the Waymarking site is a considerable hurdle for many (myself included - my head hurt every time I look at it). The good things easily get lost on there.

I really have not had any trouble useing the Waymarking site, it does take a little longer to get a listing published. I try to include good detail and reference points for my reviewer, I think that this helps. We have a few old Churches and some Cemeterys that do interest me. The only Waymark that I ever logged, there was a problem with the site, and I could not upload a photo. I gave up after a few days. Geocaching has not caught on as a sport in the area that we live, Waymarking is almost unknown. Really, maybe three Waymarkers and four EarthCache developers. :D

Share this post


Link to post

 

 

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.

 

 

Discussion? There isn't any with you. On this and many, many other threads you use the forum as a mirror. Education? Funny because you don't even seem to realize that your chosen geoname isn't after the flower.....it's the condition and the name is well chosen! :yikes:

Share this post


Link to post

 

 

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.

 

 

Discussion? There isn't any with you. On this and many, many other threads you use the forum as a mirror. Education? Funny because you don't even seem to realize that your chosen geoname isn't after the flower.....it's the condition and the name is well chosen! :D

 

Narcissa does, indeed come from the flower. Narcissus flowers get their name from the Greek mythological character, as does the serious personality disorder. I commend you for recognizing the linguistic similarity, though you're certainly not the first to fall back on such a comparison. Accusing others of serious personality disorders is not clever, it's just sad and no different than referring to someone as "retarded" because you disagree with them.

 

So, you've concluded that I'm a narcissist because I disagree with you, and have my blog URL in my signature. :) Sometimes on these forums, it's easy to make a snap judgment about someone, which then colours your perception of everything else they say. Could this be the case here? Aside from my URL, I have yet to see you come up with any real evidence of my supposed superiority complex. Is it really my blog URL that drives you around the bend every time I comment?

 

Ultimately, your sense of inferiority to others comes from within. Blaming it on me is unsurprising, but irrational. I can assure you that making you feel inferior is not my design. Your reaction to me is truly unfortunate, but I have no control over it and I'm not about to leave the forum because you're determined to misinterpret everything I say.

Share this post


Link to post

There are several participants of this thread who are simply engaging in a tedious and vigorous sparring exercise with one another: back off of this thread please. You know who you are. When I see you post to this thread again, I will at the very least remove your input.

 

I'll leave the thread open for others to engage in a positive conversation. Here is the original topic.

Share this post


Link to post

 

 

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.

 

 

Discussion? There isn't any with you. On this and many, many other threads you use the forum as a mirror. Education? Funny because you don't even seem to realize that your chosen geoname isn't after the flower.....it's the condition and the name is well chosen! :)

 

Narcissa does, indeed come from the flower. Narcissus flowers get their name from the Greek mythological character, as does the serious personality disorder. I commend you for recognizing the linguistic similarity, though you're certainly not the first to fall back on such a comparison. Accusing others of serious personality disorders is not clever, it's just sad and no different than referring to someone as "retarded" because you disagree with them.

 

So, you've concluded that I'm a narcissist because I disagree with you, and have my blog URL in my signature. :D Sometimes on these forums, it's easy to make a snap judgment about someone, which then colours your perception of everything else they say. Could this be the case here? Aside from my URL, I have yet to see you come up with any real evidence of my supposed superiority complex. Is it really my blog URL that drives you around the bend every time I comment?

 

Ultimately, your sense of inferiority to others comes from within. Blaming it on me is unsurprising, but irrational. I can assure you that making you feel inferior is not my design. Your reaction to me is truly unfortunate, but I have no control over it and I'm not about to leave the forum because you're determined to misinterpret everything I say.

I have to agree with MissJenn. I enjoy these fourms to discuss things in a positive manner, because there are lots of things that I do not understand. I have not used alot of PM features because I just don't understand how to. I am afraid to post much on this site because some users are just too eager to make fun of you because they find it "laughable" and not post any positive input.

@ Narcissa. I would not bring this up, but you did, and it needs to be addressed. You have made personal attacks on this user account in different threads all because of an issue with my wife and a ECO. You do not know all the details, you were not the CO or the other patry. Yet you post lies, calling me an "arm chair logger", not knowing the truth, because you only followed a thread. I would not even address you of this matter, had YOU not brought it up. But my fellow Americian EarthCacher that you seem to be able to "Flame" quite well used a term that I did not understand, so I got to thinking. I know by now that us geocachers sometimes use hints or clues in the title of our caches. So I googled your user account name. So I read up on it, (and the flower on your Avitar) B) I won't let the door hit me in the cache on my way out of this thread, thats a good Waymark too, go back out the same door that you came in. :) Please understand that I too am an ECO, We have less than 500 finds in two years. All of our EC finds have a photo of one or more of our family members in it, We are NOT arm chair loggers as you say. We are just a family of Country folks that enjoy caching around home in the back country. We enjoy seeking caches along hiking trails most, but what I enjoy most is creating caches that have historic value. I just want the record set straight that we are NOT the type cachers that you say that we are, I invite you to look at our account and our EC uploads. Have a nice day.

Edited by Manville Possum Hunters

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. :)

Sorry, my mistake. I am a Silver level EarthCache Master.

Share this post


Link to post

There are several participants of this thread who are simply engaging in a tedious and vigorous sparring exercise with one another: back off of this thread please. You know who you are. When I see you post to this thread again, I will at the very least remove your input.

 

I'll leave the thread open for others to engage in a positive conversation. Here is the original topic.

MissJenn, you are absolutely right! I offer you my apology for responding in such a defensive way.

Thanks for bringing us back down to reality. :P

Share this post


Link to post

Ok, let's give it a try to get this thread back on topic though I am not sure that what I am going to write fulfills the criteria for a positive conversation. (Positive somehow sounds strange for me in this context as I do not have a positive attitude towards Waymarking and I am not even pretending to have one.)

 

Those who say that EarthCaches are a better fit to Geocaching than Waymarking are probably judging Waymarking by a few categories.

 

That's at least not true for me. I am well aware of the fact that there is an enormous wealth of different categories that available and I also know that new categories could be added if they find sufficient support.

 

It is, however, quite hard to restrict ones search to all those categories that come close to what I regard as interesting virtual cache.

 

Moreover, while it is true that there exists some flexibility in the Waymarking system to add extra information that is not standard in the Waymarking system, information like the difficulty and the terrain ratings, attributes and some other features of caches cannot be easily added in a way such that they can be used in the selection process. For Earth caches, terrain ratings and attributes (e.g. danger due to potential rock falls, poison plants etc) are very important. In my opinion, the gc.com site is better suited to accomodate Earth caches (due to its design, functionality etc) than the Waymarking site though I agree from the conceptual point of view Earth caches as a subcategory of containerless caches do not fit well on the

the gc.com site (similar as event caches, CITOS etc).

 

As long as the Waymarking site is not changed considerably, actually Earth caches neither fit well on the Waymarking site nor on the gc.com site. In my opinion, the fans of Earth caches are better off with the gc.com alternative than with the Waymarking alternative (the smilie-aspect does not play any role in my statement).

 

 

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.

 

Are more details available about these plans?

 

Cezanne

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. :P

 

When I look in your area most of the Waymarks are history related with many old churches, cemeteries and places on the National Register. Many of the locations you mention as earthcaches are also listed as waymarks and others could be. Waymarking has categories for caves, springs, simulacra (rock faces etc.). I would hope that earthcaches are earth related things, they are required to be.

Share this post


Link to post

Waymarking has categories for caves, springs, simulacra (rock faces etc.). I would hope that earthcaches are earth related things, they are required to be.

 

That's true, but the focus is typically a different one in these Waymarking categories.

 

Compare e.g. this Earth cache

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...83-0c8d560fe7a3

with a typical entry in the cave entrance category. Then you will recognize the essential difference related to the educational focus and the required actvities. (Though of course categories of that type can be built in Waymarking, the system is not really designed for such purposes.)

 

Cezanne

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. :P

 

When I look in your area most of the Waymarks are history related with many old churches, cemeteries and places on the National Register. Many of the locations you mention as earthcaches are also listed as waymarks and others could be. Waymarking has categories for caves, springs, simulacra (rock faces etc.). I would hope that earthcaches are earth related things, they are required to be.

That is true, and places like those are of interest to me. I photograph old, sometimes forgotton about Cemeterys and record the location with my GPS. I was doing this before I ever heard about geocaching. Some of these photos are listed on a local hictorical web site. I agree with you that we have some nice Waymarks in our area, but just look at when they were visited. Most of them have NEVER been visited. I submitted an EC for review that involved a cave, it could not be published at this time because of White Nose Syndrome in Bats. Our local State Park is not having Cave tours this year, and ALL Caves in Tennessee State Parks are closed because of WNS. Our children enjoy geocaching for SWAG, they hate EarthCaches, they are just too young for the concept. Thanks for your positive input, I will look again at the Waymarking site, I may submit a new one for review. :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

That is true, and places like those are of interest to me. I photograph old, sometimes forgotton about Cemeterys and record the location with my GPS. I was doing this before I ever heard about geocaching. Some of these photos are listed on a local hictorical web site. I agree with you that we have some nice Waymarks in our area, but just look at when they were visited. Most of them have NEVER been visited.

 

All I can say is start the trend... visit those that interest you. Ignore the rest, it is easy to ignore whole categories of waymarks with just a couple clicks. As a waymark owner, I appreciate visits, especially from those that have insight about the location or know some interesting history or upload better photos than I took. BTW there is a category for those forgotten cemeteries.

Share this post


Link to post

Earthcaches work equally well on either geocaching or Waymarking. The listings and content would be exactly the same. Far be it for me to assume why people are willing to log listings on one site and not the other. Some people want geocaching to be exclusively for containers and others don't. Geocaching supports a variety of listing types and pretty much always has.

 

Speaking only for myself the original problems with virtual caches could not be solved. The introduction of Waymarking allowed for a game variation that removed the subjective aspect that plagued virtual caches. I can't see webcams coming back because they lack the tactile educational aspect which is another aspect missing from virtual caches. Trying to compare earthcaches to virtuals is not really possible because virtuals are very broad in scope compared to a very focused topic found in earthcaches. Earthcache reviewers are versed in geological aspects. To expect Keystone or MTN-MAN or Erikl88-r to be versed in the thousands of possible topics for a virtual cache would be unrealistic.

 

Grandfathered virtuals, webcams and the still available earthcaches are on geocaching.com because that is what the founders want. The same can be said for events and citos. My personal opinion is that this issue has more to do with where stats are displayed than anything else. People seem quite willing to log just about anything to increase their score.

 

FWIW, in between the sarcasm and off topic comments there were quite a few wise gems in many of the posts. Perhaps if the sarcasm and tone could be removed by those people before posting then those people might have a chance at being heard. As it is most people will not respect solid logic when it is dripping with venom.

 

Checkmark

Waymarking Site Admin

Share this post


Link to post

Earthcaches work equally well on either geocaching or Waymarking. The listings and content would be exactly the same. Far be it for me to assume why people are willing to log listings on one site and not the other. Some people want geocaching to be exclusively for containers and others don't. Geocaching supports a variety of listing types and pretty much always has.

 

Speaking only for myself the original problems with virtual caches could not be solved. The introduction of Waymarking allowed for a game variation that removed the subjective aspect that plagued virtual caches. I can't see webcams coming back because they lack the tactile educational aspect which is another aspect missing from virtual caches. Trying to compare earthcaches to virtuals is not really possible because virtuals are very broad in scope compared to a very focused topic found in earthcaches. Earthcache reviewers are versed in geological aspects. To expect Keystone or MTN-MAN or Erikl88-r to be versed in the thousands of possible topics for a virtual cache would be unrealistic.

 

Grandfathered virtuals, webcams and the still available earthcaches are on geocaching.com because that is what the founders want. The same can be said for events and citos. My personal opinion is that this issue has more to do with where stats are displayed than anything else. People seem quite willing to log just about anything to increase their score.

 

FWIW, in between the sarcasm and off topic comments there were quite a few wise gems in many of the posts. Perhaps if the sarcasm and tone could be removed by those people before posting then those people might have a chance at being heard. As it is most people will not respect solid logic when it is dripping with venom.

 

Checkmark

Waymarking Site Admin

BruceS made some good points, enough to get me to look at the Waymarking site again. I saw some catagories that I was unaware of, and a few that interest me. Most of the Waymarks near me have never been visited, and I would have no interest in visiting them. But I think that I could contribute to the site, even if I never log a find. Kind of like our geocaching, less than 500 finds in two years, and 77 hides and still hiding. I am going to give Waymarking a chance and try to get some Waymarks listed.

 

Thanks for your input BruceS, I never really gave the site much of a chance because I did not find local Waymarking of interest and used that to judge the site, so I missed alot of things. :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

Earthcaches work equally well on either geocaching or Waymarking.

 

I do not agree. They could equally work well if the Waymarking site had a different design and offered more functionality.

 

The listings and content would be exactly the same.

 

That's not true if terrain and difficulty rating and attributes are also taken into account.

 

Moreover, the searching tools available on Waymarking are even more old-fashioned than those on the gc.com site. For the gc.com site this does not pose a big problem for many cachers as PQs are available and superb tools like GSAK that process the PQ-data in an intelligent way. For Waymarking nothing comparable is available and moreover the lack of ratings and attributes makes it also harder to use anything else than the category for the selection process.

 

Consider the enormous number of Earth caches available, even when split up into sub categories. Terrain ratings and attributes are very important to be able to filter out those Earth caches which one never would be able to do. I cannot find anything that could do the same job on Waymarking, but maybe I overlooked something.

 

Earthcache reviewers are versed in geological aspects.

 

They used to be at least. Now it is not any longer true for all of them as they are glad to find some reviewers in some countries with a high working load.

 

To expect Keystone or MTN-MAN or Erikl88-r to be versed in the thousands of possible topics for a virtual cache would be unrealistic.

 

I agree.

 

BTW: I do not think that virtual caches should be reintroduced on gc.com - it would not work nowadays. I do think, however, that the Waymarking site is not an ideal place for the type of virtual cache I like either. That's simply a fact. I somehow have the feeling that in the discussion several types of arguments are mixed up.

If someone feels that certain types of virtual caches do not fit well into the concept of Waymarking, this does not imply that he supports new virtual caches on gc.com.

 

 

My personal opinion is that this issue has more to do with where stats are displayed than anything else. People seem quite willing to log just about anything to increase their score.

 

That might be true for a certain group, but not for everyone and it is for example definitely not true for me.

I give a chance to many alternative sites and I also looked more closely at Waymarking. It did not convince me at all.

 

 

Cezanne

Share this post


Link to post

Earthcaches work equally well on either geocaching or Waymarking.

 

I do not agree. They could equally work well if the Waymarking site had a different design and offered more functionality.

 

The listings and content would be exactly the same.

 

That's not true if terrain and difficulty rating and attributes are also taken into account.

 

Moreover, the searching tools available on Waymarking are even more old-fashioned than those on the gc.com site. For the gc.com site this does not pose a big problem for many cachers as PQs are available and superb tools like GSAK that process the PQ-data in an intelligent way. For Waymarking nothing comparable is available and moreover the lack of ratings and attributes makes it also harder to use anything else than the category for the selection process.

 

Consider the enormous number of Earth caches available, even when split up into sub categories. Terrain ratings and attributes are very important to be able to filter out those Earth caches which one never would be able to do. I cannot find anything that could do the same job on Waymarking, but maybe I overlooked something.

 

Earthcache reviewers are versed in geological aspects.

 

They used to be at least. Now it is not any longer true for all of them as they are glad to find some reviewers in some countries with a high working load.

 

To expect Keystone or MTN-MAN or Erikl88-r to be versed in the thousands of possible topics for a virtual cache would be unrealistic.

 

I agree.

 

BTW: I do not think that virtual caches should be reintroduced on gc.com - it would not work nowadays. I do think, however, that the Waymarking site is not an ideal place for the type of virtual cache I like either. That's simply a fact. I somehow have the feeling that in the discussion several types of arguments are mixed up.

If someone feels that certain types of virtual caches do not fit well into the concept of Waymarking, this does not imply that he supports new virtual caches on gc.com.

 

 

My personal opinion is that this issue has more to do with where stats are displayed than anything else. People seem quite willing to log just about anything to increase their score.

 

That might be true for a certain group, but not for everyone and it is for example definitely not true for me.

I give a chance to many alternative sites and I also looked more closely at Waymarking. It did not convince me at all.

 

 

Cezanne

I agree with you, Cezanne. I did however find some catagories listed on the Waymarking site that did interest me. I plan on trying to get a few more listings published on the site. Most of our local Waymarks have never been visited, and I won't be the first, I just find no interest in them. One of the local EarthCaches in Pennington Gap, Virginia is also listed on the Waymarking site. So are most of the local rodaside historicial markers, many of which I have placed caches of historic value near, some of my caches I have used these signs as multi caches first stage. I still do NOT have an issue with this. The Waymarking site is simply unused in our area. I think that we should keep EarthCaches and Virtuals just the way they are, and try and help make a better Waymarking site by what we contribute to it. :laughing:

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...