Jump to content

Welcome to Waymarking?


Followers 0

Recommended Posts

I am a newbie and just got an ugly response to an admitted cut and paste log I am using to log the several hundreds of waymarks I saw on one day during a trip to Washington DC. Here is my basic log -- i will add a unique sentence or two to each log. I add pictures if my pic is unique or if I am the first to visit. My machine is slow, and the photographs are hard to dig out sometimes.

 

If we have logged your waymark, it is because we personally saw it. You can believe this without photographic proof on each one because we are cachers/benchmark hunters/waymarkers of integrity. :)

 

We are writing one general log of our incredibly jam-packed sightseeing day in the interest of time, because there are thousands of waymarks within in a small radius in this part of DC and we personally visited or saw a majority of them. I regret that I lack the time and computing power to upload as many pictures as I would like.

 

We appreciate all the effort and time that went into creating this waymark, and we enjoyed our visit.

 

We took the Metro from our Woodley Park hotel to the National Mall today. This was a combined sightseeing and benchmark hunting trip. We got out at the Smithsonian station, and after visiting the museums we visited the Washington Monument, then walked around the Tidal Basin and down the Mall. We saw the USDA museum, FDR Memorial, MLK Memorial, FDR Memorial, the George Mason Memorial, the White House, the WWII Memorial, the DC WWI Memorial, the John Paul Jones Statue, some Japanese cherry tree donation statues, and Marine One flying by! We got our national parks passports stamped everywhere a station existed. We got all the virtual caches too. It was a busy day.

 

It was a beautiful day for a long stroll, and we got to finish our hike with a pic under 3 cherry trees in bloom! By the time we finished up at the Jefferson Memorial, the Youngest Blasterz and their friend Lauren were carry-me-Daddy tired! TFTWM

 

Here is the email I got:

 

Okay, if you're going with a long cut-n-paste, then prove that you're waymarkers by creating more waymarks - especially when I see that you have found over 2,000 benchmarks. Otherwise, there is no reason to even post a visit on a waymark if you cannot contribute to further knowledge about it. Cut-n-paste is lame, lame, lame...

 

I am wondering if I need to get out of this new hobby before I spend too much more time on it. I have created 20+ waymarks in the last few days (since I hurt my leg I have a lot of down time). I have ideas for several more, but frankly am not sure I will invest the time anymore...

 

I guess I could go back and just write a log that says, "I saw this statue that looked like a --------------. TFTWM" Is that adding enough new knowledge to the WM to avoid owner/group abuse? What is the etiquette here?

Link to comment

Welcome to Waymarking. You have visited many of my waymarks in 4 or 5 states and I have always enjoyed your logs. Good photos and good comments. And from the waymarks you have visited it is obvious that you enjoy going to many of the same places I like to visit. I have also reviewed a few your new waymarks and each has been well done. Not sure why someone would take offense to your logs or that you haven't created many waymarks... there is no requirement to create waymarks to visit them. Enjoy the hobby... yes there will be times it will seem you spend too much time doing it and other times you wish you had more time available to do it more.

Link to comment

 

I regret that I lack the time and computing power to upload as many pictures as I would like.

 

 

I just got a ton of cut-and-paste visit logs. Getting the same visit log over and over again is BORING! Each category has its own requirements, regardless of whether you have the time to adhere to them. If the category requires a photo, then submit a photo of the waymark. If the category says a photo is not necessary, then the choice to add one is yours.

 

Another thought: if you do not have time to add the required photos, you can log a COMMENT instead of a visit, and a photo is optional. My daughter was on tour all summer, and even though she visited several waymarks, she only had photo proof of two. Those two got visit logs, the others got comments (since she did not have the photos required for a visit log).

Link to comment

 

I regret that I lack the time and computing power to upload as many pictures as I would like.

 

 

I just got a ton of cut-and-paste visit logs. Getting the same visit log over and over again is BORING! Each category has its own requirements, regardless of whether you have the time to adhere to them. If the category requires a photo, then submit a photo of the waymark. If the category says a photo is not necessary, then the choice to add one is yours.

 

Another thought: if you do not have time to add the required photos, you can log a COMMENT instead of a visit, and a photo is optional. My daughter was on tour all summer, and even though she visited several waymarks, she only had photo proof of two. Those two got visit logs, the others got comments (since she did not have the photos required for a visit log).

 

Good feedback - thanks. I thought all photos are optional? Isn't that the Groundspeak rule? Can someone please explain, because I have seen several waymarks where it says that a photo is optional even if the logging requirements say otherwise. I am CONFUSED and need helppppp!!

 

One of my issues with the photo uploads is that while I have the photos, just it is very cumbersome with this computer getting to them and the upload is slow even on Verizon FiOS because of the age of the computer. I have not logged any waymark I did not see, but when I can't pick pictures except by numbered list (can't seem to get the setting for thumbnails to stick so I can't see them), the upload of a pic is hard. I am also a photographer, so it's not like I have only 1 pic of 1 thing. Sez hubby: :0!!! You took HOW MANY PIX today??? :0!!!

 

I remind him it's digital, not film, so no more $300 developing bills . . . ;)

 

I appreciate the kindness of the responses so far. I was about to delete this thread and go away quietly.

Link to comment

 

One of my issues with the photo uploads is that while I have the photos, just it is very cumbersome with this computer getting to them and the upload is slow even on Verizon FiOS because of the age of the computer. I have not logged any waymark I did not see, but when I can't pick pictures except by numbered list (can't seem to get the setting for thumbnails to stick so I can't see them), the upload of a pic is hard. I am also a photographer, so it's not like I have only 1 pic of 1 thing. Sez hubby: :0!!! You took HOW MANY PIX today??? :0!!!

 

I remind him it's digital, not film, so no more $300 developing bills . . . ;)

 

 

Oh yeah, we know what you mean! It took me FOREVER to switch to digital camera, and once I did I loved that it was SO cheap and I could take several hundred pics while on a trip and it would cost me nothing!

 

When we first started Waymarking, our first visit log was in a category that DID require a photo. We tried for HOURS to upload that photo. I was so worried that my visit log would be deleted, so I emailed the waymark owner and explained I was trying! He sent a super nice email back after I finally got the pic uploaded, with the comment "Now that was worth the wait!" Made me feel so good.

 

You will get lots of advice on here about programs that might help you with the upload. We personally use Ken Ward's Makeup, and believe me when I say that if I can figure out how to upload pics from a program, anyone can! Maybe someone with some tech knowledge can help you with your specific computer/software since that is completely out of my knowledge base!

 

Regarding the pic requirement "I have seen several waymarks where it says that a photo is optional even if the logging requirements say otherwise":

 

Here's how I understand it: if a category says NO pic is required (I think Fountains is one of them), even if the owner of the waymark states on the wm page "Pic required", it is NOT. The waymark owner cannot require a pic if the category description says a pic is optional. Hopefully I'm not mistaken on that issue!

 

And by the way, VERY cool on your benchmark hunting.

Edited by Max and 99
Link to comment

 

I thought all photos are optional? Isn't that the Groundspeak rule?

 

I don't think you can complete a Geocaching Challenge without a photo, so the "ALL photos are optional" is not a blanket policy. It may be that photos cannot be required for caches, since that would be an ALR (virtuals excluded).

Link to comment

I had forgotten about the pic requiremtn for challenges when I wrote the post! :P

 

We have done several challenges and created some kid-friendly ones too, but I admit that I was not going to delete logs without pix if it looked like from the log that the cacher has done the challenge (even though the requirement was to do a thing and post a pic). The experience is what I was looking for --

 

That's what got us thinking about Waymarking -- Hubby asked how challenges were different from Waymarking.

 

I guess I thought if I wrote my log in a way that showed that we actually had the experience at the waymark, that would be okay, even if I couldn't always get my hands on a pic. I also came back and uploaded some pix I had to dig out to previous waymarks.

 

What do other waymarkers do when you go to a place crazy-dense with waymarks, like our Nation's capital? We did a multi-mile hike through many museums and memorials.

 

The abusive email I got was from someone who had multiple-waymarked every piece of art in the Hirschorn gallery, a very large wonderful outdoor sculpture gallery we toured in its entirety and shot 2-300 pix in. There may be up to 75-100 waymarks in the Hirschorn alone.

 

I will check out the uploading software another poster mentioned. The photo upload is not a problem when I have 20-30 waymarks to log. 500 multiples -- PROBLEM!!

Link to comment

 

We have done several challenges and created some kid-friendly ones too, but I admit that I was not going to delete logs without pix if it looked like from the log that the cacher has done the challenge (even though the requirement was to do a thing and post a pic). The experience is what I was looking for --

 

What do other waymarkers do when you go to a place crazy-dense with waymarks, like our Nation's capital? We did a multi-mile hike through many museums and memorials.

 

 

1. Once you create a GC challenge, it no longer belongs to you, so you can't delete someone's log. (Unless something has changed recently that I am not aware of!). I could be wrong, but I thought that the system didn't allow you to complete a challenge unless you uploaded a photo (a built-in feature).

 

2. When you hit a crazy-dense waymark area, and take lots of pics, you then have plenty of pics to choose from when you log a visit to all of those waymarks. Someone once suggested on the forum a "procedure" of log a visit, upload a photo; log a visit, upload a photo. I tend to do a bunch of visit logs, then upload photos to each of them. To each his own.

 

Many waymark owners are happy with a unique descriptive log (even if a photo is not uploaded). Many of us get annoyed with cut-and-paste logs. Some waymark owners will hold you to the requirements stated on the page.

 

Just my take on some of the questions you asked.

Link to comment

If there is no picture, I expect some meaningful narrative. Not about the vacations in general and not about geocaching in the closer area. At least not exclusively. I would like to read something about this specific waymark.

 

You put a lot of effort in the wording of your visit text. It is better than many of the logs we all receive. But you do not want to compete with them, I hope. The difference between armchair visits and drive-by visits is almost negligible.

 

I think having been close to a waymark coordinate does not constitute a valid visit. You need to consciously notice the object and I seriously doubt this is possible with several hundred objects just within a couple of hours.

 

You maybe better concentrate on the ones you really do remember and can say a word about it. You don't win anything by snatching visit numbers.

Link to comment

If there is no picture, I expect some meaningful narrative. Not about the vacations in general and not about geocaching in the closer area. At least not exclusively. I would like to read something about this specific waymark.

 

You put a lot of effort in the wording of your visit text. It is better than many of the logs we all receive. But you do not want to compete with them, I hope. The difference between armchair visits and drive-by visits is almost negligible.

 

I think having been close to a waymark coordinate does not constitute a valid visit. You need to consciously notice the object and I seriously doubt this is possible with several hundred objects just within a couple of hours.

 

You maybe better concentrate on the ones you really do remember and can say a word about it. You don't win anything by snatching visit numbers.

 

I think some of that criticism is valid and I appreciate your point of view. The truth is, we did see all the sculptures and (being HIGHLY visual) I remember them - but I also had 3 kids and 4 adults with me, so it was pretty chaotic at times! I wanted to go back just me, but the schedule did not permit. I wish I had had time to spend an afternoon there to interact with each piece, and experience each one fully. This visit, I was just grateful that I got to see the art (without too many naked butt comments from the 8 year olds) and have a wonderful outing with family and friends. :)

Link to comment

I think, if it was me in such a high count waymark area, I'd be selective on the waymarks I did log a visit on...

 

It's not all about the numbers. (Is it? :laughing: )

I think I'd work on getting the different icons.

 

You may 'Log Only' with no photo, but they usually ask for a 'word picture/description'

"We visited and saw lots of waymarks, believe us because..." is not much of a description...

Link to comment

When you visit your waymark profile page, there's a tab called Category Grid. Every new category posted or visited releases a new icon in your grid. There is a strong fraction within the Waymarking community that rather plays the grid than the general stats.

 

A new icon is more important than ten or twenty new posts or visits. Especially when this icon helps building a new longest row or largest square in the grid.

 

Nobody will ever fill the grid, because some icons can only be obtained in specific areas, like Alaska or Hawaii, New Zealand, France, Korea or Latvia just to nam a few. But going as far as possible is certainly a strong incentive for many waymarkers I know.

Link to comment

Welcome to the wonderful world of Waymarking!

 

So sorry that you got a rude jolt from someone who is obviously too obsessive about their logs. I truly believe that is an exception, and not representative of the many wonderful people in this hobby.

 

Logging visits to waymarks has some peculiarities.

 

First, because of our roots in geocaching, virtual and locationless caches in particular, there was at the beginning a great emphasis on "proof of visit" in the logging requirements. So a lot of the categories specified a GPSr in the photo, or a photo of the visitor at the site. Most of this has dropped by the wayside, although a few categories still have some of this old language. Proof should really not be an issue in Waymarking.

 

Second, not only are universal guidelines for logging visits absent, they are set individually for each category. This means that the stated logging requirements vary from category to category.

 

Third, although the category manager sets the requirements, which apply to all waymarks within that category, the logs go to the individual waymarker - the person who created the waymark. So, that person can apply his own personal standards to the log even if they are things not mentioned in the logging instructions. Use of "cut and paste" is a good example.

 

My personal feeling is that visiting waymarks is up to the visitor and how they want to "play the game." Sure, I enjoy reading well-written logs that tell me something about the person's experience of visiting it, and like to see new and interesting pictures. Sometimes I get a string of visits that say nothing more than, "Saw this while geocaching in the area." Arrgh. But, I do not delete them. It doesn't detract from my waymark. If this is all that person wants to do, then that's fine with me. Photos? Well, I have waymarks in so many categories I can't keep track of which ones require photos and which ones don't. I really haven't got the time for that. And, I try to make photos optional for the categories I manage.

 

So-called "retro visits" are fine with me, too. If a person visited a waymarked site several years ago and can tell me about it, or, better yet, post another photo, then that's fine, too. Who am I to tell them how to enjoy Waymarking? They can be lazy or write a book and post a dozen photos. All this is with some common sense, of course. The only time I've deleted logs is when there was an obvious arm-chair logger. Oh, we did have a case recently when someone was taking photos from the original waymark, cropping them or doing minor changes, then posting them as his own with his visit logs. Weird.

 

So, I hope you'll not abandon Waymarking. I'd be glad to have you visit some of my waymarks - mostly in New England, California, Ohio and Oregon - and, Korea.

 

All the best!

Link to comment

Good feedback - thanks. I thought all photos are optional? Isn't that the Groundspeak rule? Can someone please explain, because I have seen several waymarks where it says that a photo is optional even if the logging requirements say otherwise. I am CONFUSED and need helppppp!!

 

 

Welcome to Waymarking. The other fellows said it all. Somehow I felt like I would like to add my 5 cents. There isn't such thing as a "Groundspeak rule". Groundspeak manages a couple of games, which with their own set of rules. You are assuming the Geocaching rules (I suppose that's what is confusing you) apply to Waymarking. They don't. Each category have its own logging requirements. Which can be upsetting considering the variety of combinations. Fortunately there is a tendency to simplify this and more and more categories are adopting the principle of "one pic of the spot required". But some old ones will still demand specific things like a picture of you or of your GPS, or a picture of a sign, etc.

Link to comment

Personally, I have a tough time writing a visit log. That's why I like to upload a picture, because it's easier than trying to find something to say about a waymark that has already said all there is to say about it.

 

The way I see a visit is an affirmation that my work creating the waymark had value to someone, and I would never complain about how they chose to express that. It goes to the "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth" school of thought.

 

If I had my druthers, though, I would always like a picture, as I am not the greatest photographer and when there are additional pictures I can switch out the main shot. And, of course, if someone was bending over backwards to pile on the praise and stoke my ego, I wouldn't complain either.

Link to comment

I would say that a Waymarking log without a picture is more likely to be accepted if it says something about the actual waymark. The waymark log is how the visitor says to the waymarker, "thanks for creating this waymark". So, when you describe your day and what brought you to town, it doesn't make the waymarker feel that the time he spent researching, writing up, photographing and getting approved was worth very much. On the flip side, sometimes, after the person has done all that work, there isn't much you can add, and a personal Thank-You is about all that is needed.

Link to comment

I would hope that I am able to pay forward the same kindness that was shown to me when I was still learning the ropes of placing and visiting waymarks - especially this weekend when I attempt to fill BruceS's mailbox with waymark visits when I go to St. Louis. Too many waymarks - not enough time! It takes entering a waymark into a category a few times before you have the requirements down pat. There's nothing worse that missing a photo (like I am for a dedicated brickway) and having to make an extended trip to get that sucker.

Link to comment

You have also noted that it takes a long time to upload photos. Most digital camera manufacturers sell their camera set at the default highest quality photo (most megapixels) which creates the largest files. I have dialed back my digital camera to take 1200 by 1600 at 180 dpi which makes nice photos to upload and are only 600-900 kb. Much easier than a huge 2 or 4 MB file for each photo.

 

I hope you continue to enjoy and contribute to Waymarking!

 

Take care,

Outspoken1

Link to comment

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...
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...