Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
S&SLaird

Visiting your own Waymark

32 posts in this topic

My wife and I have been Geocaching for a couple years now but only recently started messing with Waymarking. I see far less logs in my area for Waymakers but I have noticed that several have visits logged by the poster. I know that is generally taboo in the Geocaching world but there you are looking for something hidden and I would hope you could find something you placed. Waymarking is a differnet since nothing is hidden and seems to be all about visiting a loctation. So what is the general feeling on visiting your own Waymarks....taboo or not?

 

Seems I wouldn't post a Waymark for a location I haven't visited but logging it seems a bit strange too...maybe that is just the Cacher in me.

 

Love to hear others thoughts on the Waymarking side of this question.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Some do, some don't.

 

It is accepted, not a taboo at all. But not general practice.

 

I am a no-own-visitor, so my answer might be biased; today I don't see anything useful in owner visits. I like statistics, I have X posts and Y visits, makes X+Y locations; owner visits mess up my stats so I don't do them. But there are other approaches and they are fine as well.

 

In the early days it was not possible to filter for own waymarks, the only solution was to visit your own to find out what others posted in your area you have not visited yet. Then it made sense. When you are a beginner today, you can choose.

 

And there are the Scavenger Hunts. The way it is set up, you might be forced to visit your own to fulfill it. For me this is a (the main) reason not to participate.

Edited by fi67
0

Share this post


Link to post

You found it. You didn't 'hide' it, like you do with a cache, why not log a Visit?

 

As a cacher that also waymarks, the caching side prevents me from visiting my own waymarks! :laughing:

 

As an officer of a couple of categories, It bugs me a little that some 'Visit' their own waymark before it's approved...

I'd prefer them to hold off until it's approved. Or is it just me on that point? :unsure:

0

Share this post


Link to post

I usually do not post a visit on my posted waymarks as a general rule UNLESS I am for some reason adding waymark categories to an existing waymark - it happens more often than you would think. I don't blame others if they do post a visit, though, as they did mark the visit since they were there. I have gone back to my own waymarks to post a visit several times to fulfill a scavenger hunt, especially these two huge Missouri 100 waymark / 250 mi radius hunts that BruceS put out. Several of the waymarks in the hunts are mine.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I'm very much in line with fi67: I like to have my stats seperate, and that's the main reason for me not to visit my own waymarks. Another reason is laziness: When I post a new waymark, this implies I "visited" it. I've been there and took photos and gathered information, and all that is already documented in the waymark description. I wouldn't know what to add to that in an additional visit log. That would only mean extra time and extra effort, without extra benefit. So why bother?

 

But this is only my very personal opinion and as others said before, there are no rules. You can do as you please and whichever you choose, you won't do anything wrong.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Your posted waymark is an objective description of the waymark. When you visit your waymark, you can then add those less objective comments about the waymark that were not appropriate for the posted description.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Your posted waymark is an objective description of the waymark. When you visit your waymark, you can then add those less objective comments about the waymark that were not appropriate for the posted description.

Agreed.

 

Besides, I think of a waymark as not just a "listing" on waymark.com, but as something that you visit. (Surprise, surprise!) So therefore, when I visit a "thing" to make it into a waymark, I visited that thing. I also made it into a waymark (if approved), but that does not subtract the fact that I visited that thing. And as elyob said, I can add some text into my visit that might be of more of a personal nature that doesn't seem to fit in the listing itself. I haven't done a lot of that, but it's a good idea.

 

As to statistics, since I visit everyone of my "posts" (things that I had listed), I just subtract to find the number of other people's waymarks (things) that I've visited.

Edited by MountainWoods
0

Share this post


Link to post

Your posted waymark is an objective description of the waymark. When you visit your waymark, you can then add those less objective comments about the waymark that were not appropriate for the posted description.

Agreed.

 

Besides, I think of a waymark as not just a "listing" on waymark.com, but as something that you visit. (Surprise, surprise!) So therefore, when I visit a "thing" to make it into a waymark, I visited it that thing. I also made it into a waymark (if approved), but that does not subtract the fact that I visited that thing. And as elyob said, I can add some text into my visit that might be of more of a personal nature that doesn't seem to fit in the listing itself. I haven't done a lot of that, but it's a good idea.

 

As to statistics, since I visit everyone of my "posts" (things that I had listed), I just subtract to find the number of other people's waymarks (things) that I've visited.

I agree.

Waymarking and Geocaching are very different to me.

I wouldn't post a find log on my own geocache because before me, it didn't exist. I didn't find it, I placed it and then listed it on gc.com.

Waymarks exist outside of wm.com and exist whether or not I list them on wm.com. They must be visited before they can be listed on wm.com, thus I post a visit log on my own waymarks. I went to a particular site, I visited a particular waymark, and then if it isn't already in on wm.com, I create a listing for it.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post

@UM interesting take on the Waymarking process. In fact, that suggests — quantum theory.

 

At any given moment, a potential waymark may, or may not exist, but when a waymarker observes the waymark and in doing so places it on wm.com, then the quantum probability state of that waymark is reduced to the point of collapse, and it then becomes real. We should thus see ourselves not as mere hobbyists, but as creators of reality, bringing order from chaos.

0

Share this post


Link to post

@UM interesting take on the Waymarking process. In fact, that suggests — quantum theory.

 

At any given moment, a potential waymark may, or may not exist, but when a waymarker observes the waymark and in doing so places it on wm.com, then the quantum probability state of that waymark is reduced to the point of collapse, and it then becomes real. We should thus see ourselves not as mere hobbyists, but as creators of reality, bringing order from chaos.

Interesting: for some it's "bringing order from chaos", others call it "carpet bombing". :laughing:

 

As a conclusion, back to the topic, we can say that there are more approaches to the game and more ways to play it as there are waymarkers. So do it the way you like it! If you know yourself why you do it this way, then you get some extra points, but it is not even very important.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I too, came over from geocaching, where it is absolutely taboo - and common sense - that you do not log a "find" on your own geocache. I mean, if you "hid" it, how can you claim you "found" it? That is like buying potato salad at the market, dumping it in a bowl, taking it to the BBQ and claiming you made it yourself. If you do go back, you are just revisting your own hide. It's not a find the first time, or any subsequent time. Of course, there are some things that I have hidden in my own house that I still can't find! But that's another story.

 

I also believe that you can only "find" a geocache once. Any subsequent visit, gets logged as a "note". There are a hand full of geocaches in my general area that I revisit periodically - primarily TB Hotels and such, where I can swap trackables. Every revisit is a note.

 

When I started Waymarking, I assumed it was the same way. At first, I was just visiting existing waymarks in my area. It wasn't until I started taking pictures of things that hadn't already been waymarked, that I began submitting waymarks. That is when I ran across the comment, that went something like: "make sure to visit your waymark". I can't remember what category or categories I saw it in, but it got me thinking, "that's right, just because I'm the first to submit the waymark, doesn't mean that I didn't actually visit it". I visited it, just like anyone else who subsequently visits it. Just because I'm the one who took the time to submit it, doesn't preclude me from claiming a "visit". I even had a local geocacher/waymarker that I know, post a visit to one of my waymarks. In the post, they asked me, "Why do you visit your own waymarks?" They too, still had the geocaching mindset. Which isn't to say it's wrong; just different, in that in Waymarking, it's optional. I choose to claim them.

 

As was mentioned earlier, I absolutely don't visit them before they are published. To me, it just doesn't make sense to visit a waymark that might not get published. It's just better to wait. Yes, I've had several not get published. Most of them, because I missed a requirement, or left out something. And most of them were easily fixed and published.

 

Again, as others have stated, it's how you want to play the game. Some generally focus on specific categories, some are only concerned about filling out the category grid and not about the numbers. Some will visit their own waymarks, some won't. Play it any way that keeps you wanting to play.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Based on the comments I have dome to a couple of conclusions.

 

1) The Waymarking side of the house leaves the Geo-drama behind and seems less concerened with "rules" and more concerned with the idea of getting out of the house and enjoyng something.

 

2) There are reasons to post a visit and reasons not to post a visit so in the end it doesn't matter if you do or don't.

 

3) I use GSAK for manythings. GSAK won't track my posted Waymarkers but if I post a visit log on them it will. Case closed. For my purposes there is benifit to me to visit my posted waymarks. Actually I don't have to post the visit for GSAK to track it I only need to tell GSAK I found it.

 

One further note. We have visited a few Waymarkers so far and have posted 1 of our own. We have 2 more that we need to tweek and resend to the managers. In our travels we have found a great many locations that we can waymark and we intend to start gathering info, coords, pictures and such and posting more Waymarers in our area.

 

Only thing I have a problem with so far is the incredible number of catagories there are, it gets confusing trying to figure out what I need to post or visit a waymarker due to the extremely high number of varialbes. I guess in time we will become more educated on that and it won't be so bad but for now I have waymarks I have to return to and ones I wanted to post that I have to return to. Good thing they are close to the house.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Only thing I have a problem with so far is the incredible number of catagories there are, it gets confusing trying to figure out what I need to post or visit a waymarker due to the extremely high number of varialbes. I guess in time we will become more educated on that and it won't be so bad but for now I have waymarks I have to return to and ones I wanted to post that I have to return to. Good thing they are close to the house.

You will get used to it, most special requirements are within a certain range, often pictures. Take a lot of pictures! Full structure, close-up, different angles, all signs and markers. Most variables can be researched off-site. After a while you will know your favorite categories.

 

I bet, your next question will be about cross-posting! B)

0

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting: for some it's "bringing order from chaos", others call it "carpet bombing". :laughing:

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post

I bet, your next question will be about cross-posting! B)

 

Ok. I will bite....what is cross posting?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Gotcha!

 

Well, in Geocaching you have something hidden at a given location. One location, one cache, simple.

 

Not so in Waymarking! A place can fit into different categories. An example would be a 'Roman Catholic' 'Cathedral' that is over 100 years old ('This Old Church') is listed in the 'NRHP' , has a 'Bell Tower' that could be called a 'Unique Steeple' with a 'Town Clock' mounted, and maybe some historical markers and so on.

 

Each category lives on its own in this respect. If you want to post a waymark, then you can do it. No problem! Some post all categories they can find. Some are selective, choose their favorite categories and leave the rest for others. Same with visits. If you find a location with more than one waymark, you can visit them all; and if you find an additional category, you can post another waymark for it. That's fine. It's different than Geocaching. No active waymarker has a problem with it, but it looks weird for a beginner. You'll get used to it. Here there are no different opinions like for owner visits; it's generally accepted. There are places with over 60 categories (Space Needle, Eiffel Tower), visit them all!

 

Let's play on! My guess on your next question: Retro Visits! ;-)

0

Share this post


Link to post

Gotcha!

 

Well, in Geocaching you have something hidden at a given location. One location, one cache, simple.

 

Not so in Waymarking! A place can fit into different categories. An example would be a 'Roman Catholic' 'Cathedral' that is over 100 years old ('This Old Church') is listed in the 'NRHP' , has a 'Bell Tower' that could be called a 'Unique Steeple' with a 'Town Clock' mounted, and maybe some historical markers and so on.

 

... And don't forget the 'Stained Glass Window' category!

0

Share this post


Link to post

'Twould be an interesting thing to find the "stand in one position and visit N waymarks" that has the highest count.

 

Some individual "things" can be cross-posted to a bunch of categories. Some closely associated things taken together (for example, the statue of liberty and its pedestal) can be a series of posts in different categories. I was trying to come up with a way of describing what I'm thinking of - a lot of waymarks for a bunch of associated things - and I thought one way of describing it is: all associated "stand in one location and visit" waymarks.

 

For example, the aforementioned statue of liberty has a slew of stand-in-one-position waymarks. If you stand at the VC, you can visit that, you can visit the pedestal, you can visit the statue in multiple categories, and so on, without even having to move your feet.

 

Perhaps there's a better way of describing what I'm trying to get at. But anyway, it'd be interesting to see which particular "thing" has the most waymarks associated with it, as well as other things "attached" to it.

 

If you stand at a certain point at Niagara Falls, you can "visit" a bunch of waymarks by just observing and point-and-shoot with the camera, without having to move (other than twist your upper body).

 

Anyway, howsomever one might want to come up with a simple rule, it'd be interesting to see what "thing" (or area) has the most waymarks for it based on that rule.

 

Just a curious side game....

Edited by MountainWoods
0

Share this post


Link to post

'Twould be an interesting thing to find the "stand in one position and visit N waymarks" that has the highest count.

 

Using that definition then most likely that spot would be somewhere in the Gettysburg National Military Park.

Edited by BruceS
0

Share this post


Link to post

Oh ok. Got it. We hit one place were we took one picture that could have worked for three waymarks. It was pretty cool.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Just to add an eastern flavour to this multi-waymark per location discussion—Buddhist temples of Thailand. The grounds of Thai temples are a cornucopia of potential waymarks. There are statues of the Buddha (dah), plus a mix of: statues of Thai Kings (of which there are a lot), statues of various gods (usually Hindu), famous monks, deceased abbots, also lion statues, bells, lookout towers, historical signs, and what not.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I've always logged a visit on my own Waymarks after they were accepted, never before. It was based on two very old reasons.

 

1... Jeremy, that dreamy looking guy that is the CO of Groundspeak (or so I'm told), said something to the effect of "This is not geocaching. You are already visiting the spot to take the picture and get info so we encourage you to log a visit because you were there." And like others have said, this isn't finding something hidden, is it about documenting that you were at a location for a specific reason.

 

2... Way back before we got the tools we have now, the only way to filter our own listings was to visit them. Now, though my activity is much less, I still log a visit on my own so that I can easily subtract my placed count from my visit count and that tells me how many of others I've done.

 

FWIW, I also log that I attend my own Event Caches and CITOs... I was in "attendance" so of course I should get that credit.

 

B) BQ

0

Share this post


Link to post

When I first started Waymarking, when one of my waymarks was approved, the person who did so added that I should post a visit and have ever since. Now, I wish I hadn't so that I could play the game of seeing how many different categories I can visit that I didn't waymark myself. I just don't want to take the time to delete all my old visits...

0

Share this post


Link to post

Now, I wish I hadn't so that I could play the game of seeing how many different categories I can visit that I didn't waymark myself. I just don't want to take the time to delete all my old visits...

 

This is why I like to keep them separate as well. I like to work on a waymarks placed categories list as well as waymarks visited categories list. That said this is how I play the games and others play it their way. I'm more concerned with how many people are playing the game and how we can get others to come out and start visiting.

 

If I find there's something I'd like to add about the time I was at my waymark that might not be appropriate for the descriptions I'll usually add it as a "Leave Comment" rather than a "Visit Waymark" so it doesn't upset the stats. I've done this on occasion if there's something to add about my time there.

 

MTB

Edited by mTn_biKer65
0

Share this post


Link to post

I've recently started logging visits to my own Waymarks (gone over to the Dark Side). However, I am only logging visits if I visit the location on a separate visit from my original visit to photograph and record the details for posting the original Waymark. In this way I have developed a whole new series of locations for me to go and visit. It's a bit like maintenance visits for caches, or to put it another way, a good excuse to go for a walk.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I've recently started logging visits to my own Waymarks (gone over to the Dark Side). However, I am only logging visits if I visit the location on a separate visit from my original visit to photograph and record the details for posting the original Waymark. In this way I have developed a whole new series of locations for me to go and visit. It's a bit like maintenance visits for caches, or to put it another way, a good excuse to go for a walk.

 

Same here :rolleyes: Especially when now is in Brno so many waymarks, that sometimes i took couple of photos for new one and at home i realise that they are already published (and visited by me) and sometimes mine :blink: Or when i want to change the old main photo (i had only phone camera) by new one took by camera, i make a visit log of my waymarks too...

0

Share this post


Link to post

Based on the comments I have dome to a couple of conclusions.

 

 

I think your conclusions make a lot of sense.

 

Back in the early days, there were heated discussion about logging a visit to one's own waymark, esp. before it was actually approved. Some threatened not to approve a new waymark if that happened.

 

The only reason I might log a visit is to add some personal, subjective information that really does not belong in the waymark itself, which should always be kept subjective. Besides, it does mess up my stats which I want to reflect logging waymarks of others, not my own.

 

Category Confusion! Yes, it is a mess, isn't it? I've watched it unroll with some amazement, with little organization, with not consistency whatsoever - a ramshackle landscape that we call Waymarking. Just keep poking around, find categories that interest you, visit some, create a few and soon you'll feel right at home in our messy home.

0

Share this post


Link to post

My wife and I have been Geocaching for a couple years now but only recently started messing with Waymarking. I see far less logs in my area for Waymakers but I have noticed that several have visits logged by the poster. I know that is generally taboo in the Geocaching world but there you are looking for something hidden and I would hope you could find something you placed. Waymarking is a differnet since nothing is hidden and seems to be all about visiting a loctation. So what is the general feeling on visiting your own Waymarks....taboo or not?

 

Seems I wouldn't post a Waymark for a location I haven't visited but logging it seems a bit strange too...maybe that is just the Cacher in me.

 

Love to hear others thoughts on the Waymarking side of this question.

 

My opinion:

 

The waymark posting itself should contain nothing but facts that will generally stand the test of time.

Anything that refers to when the waymarker visited should go in a visit log. For example, a Texas Historical Markers waymark should contain the text of the the marker, perhaps the location of the marker in words as opposed to coordinates (the coordinates too of course), maybe which way the marker faces or how the marker is mounted.

 

Any discussion of what time of day or the weather or who else was around should be part of a VISIT.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Back in the early days, there were heated discussion -----

 

--- it does mess up my stats which I want to reflect logging waymarks of others, not my own.

 

Category Confusion! Yes, it is a mess, isn't it? I've watched it unroll with some amazement, with little organization, with not consistency whatsoever - a ramshackle landscape that we call Waymarking. Just keep poking around, find categories that interest you, visit some, create a few and soon you'll feel right at home in our messy home.

 

I have to commiserate with 'Silverquill' as I was always against "Visiting" your own Waymarks (unless I was visiting again and adding some additional information or photo)

- Back in 2005 there were many heated discussions and opinions stated.

OH ... and many didn't like that I insisted on adding photos to Waymark pages [:(]

0

Share this post


Link to post

For us we only visited Historical Markers. We like to keep our numbers accurate so will log it. Since its not active like geocaching is, there's no thrill in being the first to visit, etc. like there is in Geocaching.

 

If you created a Waymark and it automatically added to a visited number, then no wouldn't log it.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Unconsciously, I created my habit to post a visit of my own waymark only when I visited waymarked object for second time. B)

It means, when I return to my own, waymarked object later ... and there are good conditions to take another, different picture, .. I take it and post a visit like anyone else can.

 

And I think it’s not any issue to post even second, third, .. twentieth visit .. if I visited (and took picture of) same waymark more times.

I don’t do that often, but there’s nothing wrong with that. For example, participation in Scavenger hunts (that are natural part of the game) require us to visit own waymarks, visit already visited waymarks, etc.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1