Spoiling Virtual Geocaches

[+IceG8r]

As the owner of a very popular Virtual, I would like to find out if there is any protection from being SPOILED by Waymarkers. There are several posts on here that actually mention my virtual in their logs, and the gallery is nothing but spoilers.

[+Bear and Ragged]

Waymark it yourself, then you have some control over what's posted.

 

A local cacher set a multi-cache from a fountain I'd set as a Waymark. I solved the cache coordinates from home!

However, I have another Waymark, used in another cachers multi-cache, and ask that part of the item isn't posted in logs.

 

Big question is: Do the majority of cachers bother to check Waymarks for answers to Virtuals?

Thought about deleting any logs that have not visited the Virtual itself?

[+Mr. 0]

I don't know of any "protection" so to speak, but you might send a friendly email to the owner of the Waymark. Maybe they could edit the Waymark in such a way to keep it from spoiling the virtual. Whenever I've listed a WM that I know is also a virtual cache I typically don't include the answer to the virt in the WM description, and I'll blur answers out of the photos (or just take the photos in such a way the answer can't be had). The only problem is I have no power over what people who visit the WM might post.

[+Bear and Ragged]

I see what you mean.

 

Given it's a Waymark category, not a lot you can do.

And Groundspeak themselves brought in Waymarks to replace Virtuals.

[+a1elec]

I have a wamymark that I also used as the start of a multi and the required information was removed from the WM picture however the reviewer was not happy with this and I insisted that it was to ensure that the people actually went to the area to obtain the information. So there seems to be various schools of thought on this subject.

 

One is it is Waymarking and has nothing to do with geocaching

the other is it is information so you should be able to choose what is displayed in your waymark and this is another point that is in a different discussion topic which relates to editing waymarks.

 

Just my 2 cents worth I will go away again now

[+fi67]

Waymarking is a different game. Would you also call it spoiling if the information appeared on Flickr or any other web site? It is just bad luck and there is not much you can do about it.

 

I would certainly not willingly disturb or destroy someone else's fun as no other waymarker would, for sure. But in the end I am not interested in Geocaching and I am not interested in finding out how to look for caches in the area.

[+BruceS]

As the owner of a very popular Virtual, I would like to find out if there is any protection from being SPOILED by Waymarkers. There are several posts on here that actually mention my virtual in their logs, and the gallery is nothing but spoilers.

 

There are no protections here nor are there any at Flickr, photo bucket or any other site on the internet (including wikipedia and NPS which also have the same information). Do not be accusatory to waymarkers that is uncalled for.

 

The waymark has been there 4 years and now you become concerned, I think that is a bit late.

 

BTW there is also no restriction of a challenge being at the same location.

Edited June 5, 2012 by BruceS

[+Ddraig Ddu]

Oddly enough i've done it myself with one, clues for a final cords that need the dates off a monument. However, the monument is near the only parking area, the cache is a 300m walk across a field/mountain so it doesn't really spoil it as such.

 

Q: why not alter the cache just a little so it still needs you to visit?

[+saopaulo1]

As the virtual owner, I would add another layer to the virtual. A question about something mundane that probably wouldn't be waymarked.

[+Canadianzombie]

I know due to privacy regulations that Groundspeak doesn't and can't demand a pic, but what better way to ensure that one has actually visited the site than provide a pic of you in front of it. I have found lots of waymarks that are virts and perhaps it's not totally cool, but I've taken pics for both. I don't think Groundspeak could do much about it except ask that waymarkers obscure relevant info.

Cheers

CZ

[GT.US]

I have a good geobuddy that had 100+ armchair virtual visits before Waymarking was ever invented. He would write his logs to imply that he had been there. There are bookmark lists of virtuals that are easy to do as an armchair cacher. There will always be people who play the game differently than intended. If they are intent on finding a way around the riles they will find it.

[+Team 57]

I have a good geobuddy that had 100+ armchair virtual visits before Waymarking was ever invented. He would write his logs to imply that he had been there. There are bookmark lists of virtuals that are easy to do as an armchair cacher. There will always be people who play the game differently than intended. If they are intent on finding a way around the riles they will find it.

 

And they have fun doing armchair visits... I thought I was weird... lol

[Country_Wife]

... what better way to ensure that one has actually visited the site than provide a pic of you in front of it...

For my waymark "visits", I take photos from a variety of angles and then post the angle that nobody else has posted yet. I figure that's nearly as good, and more private. :-)

[+fi67]

Pictures of you in front of the location -- not to speak of the dreaded GPSr pictures -- are a bit old school. I appreciate all "real" visits, but for the sake of the waymark gallery I prefer pictures without people in it.

[+The Blue Quasar]

I know due to privacy regulations that Groundspeak doesn't and can't demand a pic, but what better way to ensure that one has actually visited the site than provide a pic of you in front of it. I have found lots of waymarks that are virts and perhaps it's not totally cool, but I've taken pics for both. I don't think Groundspeak could do much about it except ask that waymarkers obscure relevant info.

Cheers

CZ

 

That is untrue. It sounds like you are mixing ALRs with Waymarking / There is no reason for Groundspeak to do that.

 

BQ

[Country_Wife]

...It sounds like you are mixing ALRs with Waymarking ...

Since this forum is about getting started with Waymarking, perhaps someone will be kind enough to explain what an ALR is?

 

As for the concern about spoiling virtual geocaches, I'm a waymarker who has never geocached and so I suppose that I might unintentionally spoil a virtual through my total ignorance of its existence. I doubt I'll lose sleep over it, but if someone were kind enough to explain how to avoid doing this, I might take the appropriate steps.

Edited July 16, 2012 by Country_Wife

[+Max and 99]

...It sounds like you are mixing ALRs with Waymarking ...

Since this forum is about getting started with Waymarking, perhaps someone will be kind enough to explain what an ALR is?

 

As for the concern about spoiling virtual geocaches, I'm a waymarker who has never geocached and so I suppose that I might unintentionally spoil a virtual through my total ignorance of its existence. I doubt I'll lose sleep over it, but if someone were kind enough to explain how to avoid doing this, I might take the appropriate steps.

 

I believe ALR stands for Alternate Logging Requirement. ALRs for geocaches are no longer allowed.

 

If you wanted to avoid posting spoilers in your waymark (things that might interfere with a virtual geocache's "Proof of visit"), you could click on "nearest geocaches" from any waymark and see which virtual geocaches may be at the same location. Similarly, you can click on "nearest waymarks" from any geocache page.

Edited July 16, 2012 by Max and 99

[Country_Wife]

I believe ALR stands for Alternate Logging Requirement. ALRs for geocaches are no longer allowed.

 

If you wanted to avoid posting spoilers in your waymark (things that might interfere with a virtual geocache's "Proof of visit"), you could click on "nearest geocaches" from any waymark and see which virtual geocaches may be at the same location. Similarly, you can click on "nearest waymarks" from any geocache page.

Thanks so much, Max & 99 - I'll have a look for that. Still learning my way around the site. :-)

[Checkmark]

...It sounds like you are mixing ALRs with Waymarking ...

Since this forum is about getting started with Waymarking, perhaps someone will be kind enough to explain what an ALR is?

 

As for the concern about spoiling virtual geocaches, I'm a waymarker who has never geocached and so I suppose that I might unintentionally spoil a virtual through my total ignorance of its existence. I doubt I'll lose sleep over it, but if someone were kind enough to explain how to avoid doing this, I might take the appropriate steps.

 

I believe ALR stands for Alternate Logging Requirement. ALRs for geocaches are no longer allowed.

 

If you wanted to avoid posting spoilers in your waymark (things that might interfere with a virtual geocache's "Proof of visit"), you could click on "nearest geocaches" from any waymark and see which virtual geocaches may be at the same location. Similarly, you can click on "nearest waymarks" from any geocache page.

 

ALR is short for Additional Logging Requirement and at one time they were allowed for mystery caches. Usually the cache was at the posted coordinates and in order to log the find people would have to do something extra. Wear a silly wig, stand under a waterfall, write their log in rhyme, stuff like that. Eventually it was decided to stop allowing these add-ons to physical caches. The "take a photo" was probably the most common ALR.

 

Where ALRs differ from the logging of waymarks or virtual caches is that the photo in this case is the proof of being there and seeing the item tagged because there is no logbook. Many virtual caches require a picture and if the owner doesn't enforce it then they stand the chance of their virtual cache being permanently archived.

 

See these articles for more info

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=310

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=307#maint

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=308#grandfathered

edit to add http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=309

Edited July 24, 2012 by Checkmark

[+Outspoken1]

Please don't shoot the messenger. As has already been mentioned, Waymarking was developed to replace Virtual Geocaches. I would add that there are many other websites that could provide the 'information' to log a virtual. You will never get rid of people who wish to 'cheat' or think the 'win' by having the most numbers.

 

I always tend to look at quality versus quantity. And most of us (either Waymarkers or Geocachers or both) 'know' who is cheating or creating junky Waymarks and just laugh at them. Best solution, I think!!

 

Take care,

Outspoken1

[+iconions]

Please don't shoot the messenger. As has already been mentioned, Waymarking was developed to replace Virtual Geocaches. I would add that there are many other websites that could provide the 'information' to log a virtual. You will never get rid of people who wish to 'cheat' or think the 'win' by having the most numbers.

 

I always tend to look at quality versus quantity. And most of us (either Waymarkers or Geocachers or both) 'know' who is cheating or creating junky Waymarks and just laugh at them. Best solution, I think!!

 

Take care,

Outspoken1

 

That was rather WELL spoken - Outspoken1!

[+Chasing Blue Sky]

Please don't shoot the messenger. As has already been mentioned, Waymarking was developed to replace Virtual Geocaches. I would add that there are many other websites that could provide the 'information' to log a virtual. You will never get rid of people who wish to 'cheat' or think the 'win' by having the most numbers.

 

I always tend to look at quality versus quantity. And most of us (either Waymarkers or Geocachers or both) 'know' who is cheating or creating junky Waymarks and just laugh at them. Best solution, I think!!

 

Take care,

Outspoken1

 

I totally agree!

 

Someone who is going to cheat, is going to cheat, whether it takes them 30 seconds or 10 minutes to do it. It is interesting that in researching most waymarks that I post, I've readily found the information on the internet that I've used to "flesh out" the description of the waymark. If I've found the information online, so can the cheater. Therefore, are we really "spoiling" the virtual cache by creating waymarks?

 

As a geocacher, I have to admit, that I've always liked searching out the virtual caches, especially when I travel - I only wish that I'd thought to start taking pictures of them when I first started. Then I would have already had the pics to visit the waymarks. That's one of those things that you learn as you go.

 

Chasing Blue Sky

[+flipflopnick]

As Bear and Ragged wrote in the first reply Cachers do not click the Nearest Waymarks link on the cache page. Cachers who Waymark have posted caches at their Waymarks. Their cache gets logged, whereas the Waymark does not. So having Waymarks which solve the cache is not a problem. Nearly all cachers are ignorant of Waymarking.

 

When a local Multi cache is placed nearby I have the answers in place as my Waymarks posted years earlier. Just shows how newbies do not look for spoilers.

BTW I always look for answers to Multis and Virtuals online before venturing out.

We all play this game in different ways. I admire finders who choose a non standard way to achieve their goal.

Edited January 28, 2013 by flipflopnick

[+aurght]

I started in the geocaching game. Did a few waymarks, and it gradually dawned that the virtuals are still alive and well.

I will still geocache, but waymarks are now part of my game.

 

Bonus; one might occasionally give me some help on a tough multi or a virtual for which I did not collect all the answers.

 

We all play a different game and mine just got more fun.

[+BruceS]

I started in the geocaching game. Did a few waymarks, and it gradually dawned that the virtuals are still alive and well.

I will still geocache, but waymarks are now part of my game.

 

Bonus; one might occasionally give me some help on a tough multi or a virtual for which I did not collect all the answers.

 

We all play a different game and mine just got more fun.

 

Welcome to Waymarking. Glad you found this part of the game... have fun with it.