Is it time to give up on my vision

[+tozainamboku]

I started the Best Kept Secret category eight years ago as an attempt to carve out a niche in Waymarking for people who enjoyed virtual geocaches. I started the "wow" waymarkers group and we discussed what we thought was "wow" about virtual caches. A consensus formed in the group that what made us go "wow" about a virtual was when it brought you to a place you would not otherwise have found out about. That place certainly had to have some special interest - but rather than trying to define that we thought we could simply ask for places that weren't in most tourist guides and even the locals would not know about. We also wanted the experience to be like finding a virtual geocache. You would do something at the location to verify you found what you were intended to find. Usually this meant a verification question that could not be answered without visiting the location.

 

I believe it was Jeremy who suggested the name of the category. I don't think he cared much for the attempt at using a Waymarking category to respond to the people who objected to virtual caches being grandfathered - as it pointed out that the generic waymark was not the same thing as a virtual cache.

 

The name has had a unfortunate side effect. I think many people look at Waymarking category titles and never bother to read the description. They have in their mind that a Best Kept Secret is either something that has been hidden for many years and only recently discovered or just something that doesn't get as much publicity as a better known location nearby.

 

I recently declined two Best Kept Secret submissions. One was some murals in a Polish church that had been hidden for hundreds of year behind a wall and only recently discovered. The other was the Survivor Tree at Ground Zero in NYC. I'm not so sure that the tree is such a Best Kept Secret - but certainly many who visit Ground Zero may go by and not even notice it.

 

After eight years, I can see that my vision of trying to use Waymarking to replicate what I (and many others) enjoyed about virtual caches isn't working out. Many people still don't get the idea of a virtual cache being a specific object that you must find using the coordinates and for which you verify that find by answering a question or taking a picture. For them simply picking a few favorite Waymarking categories and going to visit them satisfies their needs. For others, anything short of a virtual cache that counts as a geocaching find is not going to be satisfying. I'm beginning to think the number of people for whom ordinary Waymarking categories are not enough, but who are willing to find virtual caches that are not listed on Geocaching.com, is very small.

 

If I decide to remove the virtual cache verification requirement from Best Kept Secrets, I would probably also not be interested in leading the category any more.

 

Right now I'm just looking for comments and suggestions.

[+The A-Team]

Sorry to hear you've lost faith in the category. I've been hoping to post something to this category and haven't gotten around to it yet. Since you're here, maybe I'll run my idea by you to see if you think it fits your vision.

 

While researching for another Waymark, I found this site (specifically the section at the bottom titled "Cracking the codes on Broad Street") that describes something I didn't know about and I'm sure very few people know about, even though they may have walked over them every day. They're stones embedded in the sidewalk marking the names of the streets in one part of the city. There are similar stones or signs in sidewalks all over the downtown area, but 24 of them in this area have a secret. The secret is that the patterns on the top of the stones aren't random, but are actually words from a poem written in morse code. Apparently they were quietly installed in 2000 with no explanation, so most people likely have no idea about this secret. For verification, I can direct visitors to a specific sign that isn't pictured on the above site and get them to decode what's engraved on it.

 

I'm interested to hear if this is in line with what you originally envisioned for the category.

[+Ambrosia]

I think I've mentioned this before, so sorry if it's a repeat. I think it is a great idea. But it doesn't work in real life for me. The object is to point out something cool, and ideally keep the secret. The couple times that I've found something that would work in this category, there was already a cache or virt in place, or other waymarks. So I've never posted in this category.

[+Metro2]

I've been Waymarking for a few years now..and never explored geocaching...so, I still don't understand what a "virtual cache" is. Could someone explain it to me? I thought I would eventually figure it out in the context of conversations...but I haven't. All the conversations assume a knowledge of this term. Thanks.

[+Weathervane]

I tend to agree that most people do not read all of the category descriptions. With over 1000 categories, you have to have a lot of time on your hands to familiarize yourself with all of them. I would probably create a waymark in that category if I could not find one to visit and wanted to get the icon on my grid.

 

Also, we appear to have moved beyond asking visitors to perform a task at the site. People are pressed for time. They may go, take a look and get a photo if it’s in the area they are visiting, but to ask them to find some information related to the waymark is probably more than they are prepared to do given that almost all of the other waymarks do not have that requirement.

 

With this category, it’s difficult for reviewers to assess the validity of the statements provided on the waymark page if they do not live in the same city. A best secret can be something quite subjective that will not necessarily appeal to someone else.

 

At this stage, my take on your category would be to remove the verification requirement and allow the type of waymarks that were recently denied. I would have made an effort to visit both of these waymarks had I been in the areas in question. There would again be some degree of subjectivity on the part of reviewers but it appears to me that it would also generate more interesting waymarks. You may therefore wish to rewrite your category to reflect this.

 

If you prefer not to get involved should removing the verification be the only option, it may be better to seek a new leader and let him/her rewrite the category.

[+Ambrosia]

I've been Waymarking for a few years now..and never explored geocaching...so, I still don't understand what a "virtual cache" is. Could someone explain it to me? I thought I would eventually figure it out in the context of conversations...but I haven't. All the conversations assume a knowledge of this term. Thanks.

 

Here's the list of cache types (virtuals are near the bottom): Linky

[+fi67]

I do not get the logic behind the idea of removing the verification requirement. What is posted and why is absolutely not related to the visit instructions. No matter how you decide, it will not have any effect at all on what new waymarks are being submitted.

 

Many people still don't get the idea of a virtual cache being a specific object that you must find using the coordinates and for which you verify that find by answering a question or taking a picture. For them simply picking a few favorite Waymarking categories and going to visit them satisfies their needs. For others, anything short of a virtual cache that counts as a geocaching find is not going to be satisfying. I'm beginning to think the number of people for whom ordinary Waymarking categories are not enough, but who are willing to find virtual caches that are not listed on Geocaching.com, is very small.

 

I think this quote shows the main problem. You assume that the average waymarker is happy to visit ordinary categories. This is not the case. The average waymarker has no special need for visits at all. An average waymarker goes out to find new locations, to be the first there and post a waymark. Some will log a visit when they pass by an existing waymark, but most will never go out to find an existing waymark, no matter how special. In this sense, wamarking is more like locationless caches. It's not about finding waymarks, it's about finding locations and turning them into waymarks; the waymark is the FTF on a location that was placed by Mother Nature or whoever. With over 1000 categories it is not easy to remember that there's "Best Kept Secrets" that may be a good choice under certain circumstances. Yes, visits of existing waymarks do happen, but it is not the main thing at all.

 

Your category is a nice idea. I do not see any need to change anything substantial. But you have to accept that Waymarking.com with over 1000 categories and a community that is more into posting than visiting is not the friendliest and easiest environment for it.

[+Weathervane]

The waymark page states as follows: "Visitors must answer the verification questions (or post a photo when that alternative is allowed)." So clearly, a question must be asked by the person creating the waymark and the person visiting must be in a position to answer it.

 

I have more than once read the statement claiming that finding a location and creating a waymark takes precedence over visiting a waymark. The profiles of those who have created the most waymarks lends credence to that statement. I agree that it is much more satisfying to create a waymark than having to visit one and write a sentence or two about an object that has been waymarked in 10 or more categories. Also, I understand that not much time can be devoted to visiting waymars when traveling to other cities or countries in search of new items to waymark. Having said that, however, my view is that Waymarking will only continue to exist if we can have many more people actually visit waymarks and increase revenue through purchasing yearly memberships. It may be that Groundspeak will find a way to capitalize on the accumulation of currently available waymarks, but the status quo appears to prevail at this time in so far as how the game is being played . Visiting a waymark encourages those who take the time to create them and this may spur others to follow suit. So my resolution for the coming year is to ensure that my visit count remains equal to or superior to my created waymark count.

[+Metro2]

Thanks Ambrosia... I think I get it now.

Edited December 21, 2013 by Metro2