Conspiracy Theory

[+MountainWoods]

Perhaps you fellow waymarkers (as opposed to trolls) have noticed lately that there have been quite a few posts within existing topic threads, as well as whole new topic threads, where the poster rants and raves about Waymarking and why it should not exist. In the vast majority of cases there is no solid justification given. Perhaps some bad personal experience, but definitely nothing to warrant eliminating the whole hobby.

 

At first I was puzzled. If you don't like something, why bother to blast off in a forum where folks do like that thing. As I mentioned in one of those threads, I'm totally disinterested in team sports. So why would I sign up for a baseball discussion group and start blasting the game and saying that it shouldn't even exist, especially when I don't have any valid justification for the remark. My own disinterest is not a valid justification for such a rant in such a forum.

 

Last night it occurred to me. There have often been discussions in the geocaching forums about bringing back virtual caches. I started geocaching long after virtuals were stopped; but I've visited several virtuals and enjoyed them. I'm sure I would be happy if they did return, just like a lot of other geocachers.

 

Then it occurred to me: Perhaps geocachers are voicing their hatred, disgust, and desire to have Waymarking killed in a feeble attempt to get Groundspeak to reinstate virtuals, and probably eliminate Waymarking. What do you think?.

 

Even if Groundspeak ever reinstated virtual geocaches allowing new ones, I would still do Waymarking, because they are two different things. The virtuals that I have been to are usually very good write-ups about the "cache" being visited, and would easily translate into equivalent waymarks (if they haven't already) in some appropriate category. But I see the two hobbies as having different poster/seeker orientations, which I won't go into in this thread. (Perhaps I will do so later in a different thread.)

[+stijnhommes]

Although I rarely rant, that pretty much sums up my feelings.

 

Waymarks might be fun for some people, but they're not for me, because, to put it bluntly: they are not caches. They're not listed on geocaching.com as a cache and they don't factor into my cache statistics. On a side note: there are too many waymarks to ever get all your "smileys" in one area and far to few rules to govern what can and cannot be waymarked (as compared to caches)

 

I'd be perfectly happy for waymarks to exist, but I too harbor a secret feeling that if they were killed off, perhaps the virtuals might return instead. And THAT would be fun for me.

[+BruceS]

 

I'd be perfectly happy for waymarks to exist, but I too harbor a secret feeling that if they were killed off, perhaps the virtuals might return instead. And THAT would be fun for me.

 

Waymarking can exist independent of virtual caches. Virtual caches could have been reinstated at anytime in the 8 years since when they were no longer being published but that decision has not been made. That decision has nothing to do with whether Waymarking exists or not. I have been around long enough to remember many forum threads where many felt virtual caches were not caching either and that they were the bane to real caching.