Count up / Count down

[+PISA-caching]

Hi,

 

I was wondering, if there is any category for public count-downs and/or count-ups (is that the correct opposite of count-down?), like for example this one:

 

The big number shows the actual debts of Germany and the smaller number shows the increase of the debts per second.

 

I've seen such things from time to time (and I'm not talking about traffic lights with count-down functionality). Here in Vienna we have several count-ups and count-downs as part of a an art project in an underground area. They might be an interesting waymark, but I couldn't find a category that would fit.

 

Any ideas?

Edited September 25, 2014 by PISA-caching

[+fi67]

This is an interesting idea.

 

Except the ones that just count down the time to a given event, they tend to be temporary by design.

[+PISA-caching]

This is an interesting idea.

 

Except the ones that just count down the time to a given event, they tend to be temporary by design.

 

One of the count-downs I mentioned in the initial posting is counting down the days until it is safe again to live in Tschernobyl. That's also "temporary", but I think it's about 140.000 days or so. :-) I guess that Waymarking.com will not live that long. In other words: If the event is far enough in the future, it should be ok.

 

But I think all the others are counting up something (worldwide military spending this year, land mine casualties this year, eaten Wiener Schnitzels this year etc.).

 

Maybe there are also some that go up and down (for example the number of inhabitants of a city). And there are some that are calculated/estimated and maybe others that are precise. Either way, it would be great to have a category for something like that, even if you don't find one around every corner.

Edited September 25, 2014 by PISA-caching

[+Rikitan]

This is an interesting idea.

 

Except the ones that just count down the time to a given event, they tend to be temporary by design.

+ 1 yeah from me

[+PISA-caching]

Two "yes" and zero "no" votes aren't that bad, but I was hoping for more feedback. I thought that it would be interesting to see the change of the counting numbers with every visitor taking a picture of it. But I have no idea how prevalent these counters are. I can imagine, that they are quite rare, but on the other hand "Dead Vehicles" are also quite rare. :-) Or is it just, that most of you think it is boring stuff? Don't treat me with care, tell me what you think. :-)

 

Maybe you need some more examples:

 

Bike counter in NYC

Bike counter in San Francisco and Copenhagen

A wind turbine on Lamma Island with displays showing current power output and cumulative energy produced

Edited October 14, 2014 by PISA-caching

[+PISA-caching]

Almost 3 years ago I had this idea and 2 days ago it came to my mind again, when I took this photo. The feedback in 2014 was slim. So, I ask again: What would you think of a category for countups and countdowns? I think that some of them might be very interesting, especially if you see how the numbers changed over the months/years when you look at the gallery of the waymark.

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

If these countdown clocks are installed as art projects, are they temporary? 

 

I'm glad that the countdown clocks on traffic signals are excluded - that would be SERIOUSLY overprevalent. BUT are there enough of these to not be UNDERPREVALENT? 

 

The only such countdown I have seen in the US is a National Debt counting clock in Washington DC many years ago.

 

edited to add: it looks like most of these debt countdiwn clocks have migrated to the Internet, and do not have a presence in the real world. 

 

I did find one in NYC - that's 2 I know of in the US. I'll keep looking. . . 

Edited July 21, 2017 by Benchmark Blasterz

[+elyob]

I have seen many bike counters.

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

30 minutes ago, elyob said:

I have seen many bike counters.

Can you post a photo of one? I have never seen one  

[+elyob]

There is a link to a bike-counter in the above post by PISA-caching (14 Oct 2014), will that do?

 

Edited July 21, 2017 by elyob

[+PISA-caching]

10 hours ago, Benchmark Blasterz said:

If these countdown clocks are installed as art projects, are they temporary? 

 

I'm glad that the countdown clocks on traffic signals are excluded - that would be SERIOUSLY overprevalent. BUT are there enough of these to not be UNDERPREVALENT? 

 

The only such countdown I have seen in the US is a National Debt counting clock in Washington DC many years ago.

 

edited to add: it looks like most of these debt countdiwn clocks have migrated to the Internet, and do not have a presence in the real world. 

 

I did find one in NYC - that's 2 I know of in the US. I'll keep looking. . . 

 

The countdown clocks have been there for years when I started the thread and I'm sure they are still there. They are inlcuded in the stone wall panels. Next time I'm in the area i will take some phots.

 

Yes, prevelance could be a problem. I haven't seen many of them yet, but on the other hand they aren't really eyecatching like a big fountain or something. So maybe we haven't seen many of them, because we didn't search for them. :-) I think I have once seen a visitor counter at the entrance of an amusement park (Legoland maybe) and I'm sure that there are more out there. At least I know of another solar facility that lists the collected power. I will keep looking too.

[+PISA-caching]

Today we made a trip to a city in Austria, where we have never posted waymarks before. In fact nobody has ever posted a waymark there. It's a rather small city, that we visited because of that challenge and guess what, I found a counting display. :-) More later, when I created the according waymark.

Edited July 22, 2017 by PISA-caching

[+elyob]

Parkades often have counters to let drivers know which level to try first.

 

[+PISA-caching]

Good point. We don't own a car, therefore I never paid attention to that kind of stuff, but it makes sense. Will have an eye on that in the future. Thanks for the hint.

[+fi67]

We have counters at all major roads entering the inner city to show the number of free lots in all the different public car parks.

 

For me this is going a bit too broad. I like the idea of counters with a scientific, political or socio-cultural background, they are not very common, but they exist. Adding all sorts of traffic-related or sold tickets counters waters it down in my opinion.

 

I would not buy the Prevalent criterion for the cost of the Interesting one.

[+PISA-caching]

The problem is: Not all traffic-related counters are boring and not all scientific counters are interesting. If for example there is one place in a huge city where they count the number of passengers that cross a bridge, I would be interested to see it. If there are dozens of parkades with a counter at the entrance, it gets boring. But there are many similar examples. When I think about "Exact Replicas" I find it boring to see the many replicas of the statue of liberty and the liberty bell, but (for me) that would be no reason to exclude them. But most US waymarkers love to show that their city also has a replica of those two liberty symbols. Back to the counters: While it might be boring if you have lots of similar counters in your city, the same kind of counter might be something special in a smaller city.

Edited to add: When the category "Feed the Animals" started, I was a little worried, that there will only be waymarks like "Feed the goats", "Feed the Sheep" or any other farm animals. And yes, there are several of these, but also "Feed the Bears", "Feed the Southern Stingrays" and many more and I wouldn't want to miss the goats and sheeps either.

Edited July 24, 2017 by PISA-caching

[+PISA-caching]

My first uncategorized waymark with a counter.

[+elyob]

I guess I won't have the first waymark in that category. 

[+PISA-caching]

Ok, great. I started a new group. I hope that many of you like the idea too. Over the last years I have seen several counters and countdowns on a public display. May it be the energy that a solar plant is gathering or cyclists, that pass a certain place and I'm sure that we will be surprised to see what other waymarkers find. I would include any counter that is permanent and every countdown that isn't obviously temporary. And it will be interesting to see the differences between the inital photos and the photos of the visitors.

 

So, anybody who is interested in participating (either as a future officer and/or by helping to create a good description) is invited to join the group and/or post their ideas here in the forum.

[+PISA-caching]

2 hours ago, BK-Hunters said:

Will that count as six Waymarks? 

 

Just noticed - it's not about energy production, it's primarily about water levels and flow.

Keith

 

There's half a "Time and Temperature" waymark at the bottom. Sooooo, only five new waymarks I'm afraid.

 

Seriously spoken: That would be a great waymark for the new category. I personally am interested to see developments over time. For example, the counter in my initial posting shows the debts of Germany. I took the photo five years ago and would be curious to see what it shows today. The display at the Libby Dam will most likely show similar data over the next couple of years, but on the other hand it might be interesting to see, if there are seasonal differences. So, definitely ONE more waymark for the new category.  

 

 

[+PISA-caching]

I was more thinking of all the visitors that your waymark will have. 

 

As a requirement for visits I would suggest a closeup photo so that the initial data and the data at the time of the visit can be compared.

[+elyob]

11 hours ago, PISA-caching said:

 

 

As a requirement for visits I would suggest a closeup photo so that the initial data and the data at the time of the visit can be compared.

 

I like the closeup photo as a visit requirement.  However, visit requirements are almost completely ignored.

[+PISA-caching]

On ‎8‎/‎14‎/‎2019 at 9:45 PM, elyob said:

 

I like the closeup photo as a visit requirement.  However, visit requirements are almost completely ignored.

 

Not by me :-) and I would presume that if the counter IS the waymark, that nobody will just upload a photo from a distance.

[+Max and 99]

On 8/14/2019 at 2:45 PM, elyob said:

 

I like the closeup photo as a visit requirement.  However, visit requirements are almost completely ignored.

It's kinda hard to enforce visit requirements when the Waymarking Page states this for hunts:

 

Do I have to post a photo with my visit logs?

No, but it is highly encouraged. A good picture makes a waymark come alive, as well as gives you something to reminisce over as you look back on the hunts you completed.

[+PISA-caching]

On ‎8‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 11:22 PM, Max and 99 said:

It's kinda hard to enforce visit requirements when the Waymarking Page states this for hunts:

 

Do I have to post a photo with my visit logs?

No, but it is highly encouraged. A good picture makes a waymark come alive, as well as gives you something to reminisce over as you look back on the hunts you completed.

 

Where did you find that text? If I google "A good picture makes a waymark come alive" I only find this thread.

[+Max and 99]

3 minutes ago, PISA-caching said:

 

Where did you find that text? If I google "A good picture makes a waymark come alive" I only find this thread.

It's on the Waymarking page, in the scavenger hunt FAQ.

 

My Scavenger Hunts.

Create a new scavenger hunt

Learn about scavenger hunts

[+PISA-caching]

I'm happy to see that several of you have already joined the group. Right now I'm working on a description for the new category. Here's one snippet, for which I would appreciate your Input:

 

"Countdowns are often temporary. Therefore, every countdown in this category has to meet the following criteria:
If the countdown is counting days or other units of time, the countdown's end has to be 5 or more years in the future. This eliminates:
- countdowns at traffic lights that indicate the time until the light will turn green.
- countdowns to an event that will take place in the near future"

 

Does that sound like a good idea or is "5 years" not enough? Any Input is highly appreciated.

[+PISA-caching]

4 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

It's on the Waymarking page, in the scavenger hunt FAQ.

 

My Scavenger Hunts.

Create a new scavenger hunt

Learn about scavenger hunts

 

Ok. Well, many categories demand the upload of a photo from visitors and whatever is written in the FAQs I just take as a basic rule, which can be overruled by the particular category. Just my personal opinion of course.

[+Max and 99]

55 minutes ago, PISA-caching said:

 

Ok. Well, many categories demand the upload of a photo from visitors and whatever is written in the FAQs I just take as a basic rule, which can be overruled by the particular category. Just my personal opinion of course.

IF Groundspeak asked me (they haven't, but they should), I would ask that they remove that ONE sentence from scavenger hunts. The waymark owner cannot require a photo as it is written.

[+PISA-caching]

26 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

IF Groundspeak asked me (they haven't, but they should), I would ask that they remove that ONE sentence from scavenger hunts. The waymark owner cannot require a photo as it is written.

 

This is getting off-topic, but if they asked me, I would ask them to remove the sentence "It's entirely up to you when deciding what to post." from the Visits section of the Waymarking FAQ or at least they should add a sentence that Visit Instructions may not be ignored.

[+Max and 99]

53 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

IF Groundspeak asked me (they haven't, but they should), I would ask that they remove that ONE sentence from scavenger hunts. The waymark owner cannot require a photo as it is written.  The sentence reads:

Do I have to post a photo with my visit logs?

No, but it is highly encouraged. A good picture makes a waymark come alive, as well as gives you something to reminisce over as you look back on the hunts you completed

Adding this sentence makes 99.99% of category visit requirements meaningless.

 

22 minutes ago, PISA-caching said:

 

This is getting off-topic, but if they asked me, I would ask them to remove the sentence "It's entirely up to you when deciding what to post." from the Visits section of the Waymarking FAQ or at least they should add a sentence that Visit Instructions may not be ignored.

I agree!

 

I'll get back on topic now.

[+PISA-caching]

I just had the idea that the visit requirement could be:

 

Post a closeup photo of the display or include the numbers of the display in the Comment field of your visit.

 

This way the visitor doesn't have to upload a photo, but we still know how the numbers on the display changed. This requirement ignores the sentence "It's entirely up to you when deciding what to post." from the Waymarking FAQ, but on the other hand we give the visitor at least two opportunities. What do you think about it?

[+Max and 99]

57 minutes ago, BK-Hunters said:

 

From the hundreds of visits we get, for the most part instructions for visits are ignored. 

 

It is difficult enough trying to remember all the guidelines for posting a waymark, I find it impossible to try and remember all visit instructions too. 

 

I didn't say that quote.

[+elyob]

1 hour ago, PISA-caching said:

I just had the idea that the visit requirement could be:

 

Post a closeup photo of the display or include the numbers of the display in the Comment field of your visit.

 

This way the visitor doesn't have to upload a photo, but we still know how the numbers on the display changed. This requirement ignores the sentence "It's entirely up to you when deciding what to post." from the Waymarking FAQ, but on the other hand we give the visitor at least two opportunities. What do you think about it?

 

The difficult part about visit requirements is that enforcement falls to the individual waymark owner, not to us category reviewers. Category officers are not informed about waymark visits.   Only once or twice have I deleted the hundreds of visit logs that fail to meet the visit criteria for my own waymarks.  It is more than enough work to enforce requirements as a reviewer without policing visits.  We can suggest visit criteria for us keeners but don't expect anyone else to follow visit requirements.

[+PISA-caching]

15 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

I didn't say that quote.

 

I said it and I know that there will be people who just write "was there" and don't upload any photo. But should we remove all the traffic lights, because some ignore them? If I ask for a closeup photo of the display, - for me - this is nothing spectacular. I wouldn't upload a photo of a sign or gravestone or something of that size from several hundred meters distance. Soooo, yes there will be people who do that, but I don't write visit instructions for them, but for the "good waymarkers". And regarding the FAQs I think that Groundspeak should update them and - like Max and 99 said - remove sentences like the ones mentioned above. Otherwise, visit instructions make no sense at all.

Edited August 20, 2019 by PISA-caching

[+PISA-caching]

15 minutes ago, elyob said:

We can suggest visit criteria for us keeners but don't expect anyone else to follow visit requirements.

 

That's everything I want. For me it's a "reminder" for those who read the instructions, not to upload a photo of the entire building, but just the display. I know that some will not even read it, some will read it, but ignore it and some will read it long time after they took the photos and will not go back to take a closeup photo. But maybe they will think about it when they visit the next display.

 

BTW: I don't think that I ever deleted a visit of one of my waymarks, simply because I don't care, if the waymarker has really been there or not.

Edited August 20, 2019 by PISA-caching

[+Max and 99]

At this point in my Waymarking journey, I'll take ANY photo over NO photo on my visited waymarks.

(I've happily given exceptions to someone when they message me with a reason). Things happen. I understand.

 

elyob:

When I first started Waymarking, I visited a benchmark in another state. I received a message from the waymark owner, letting me know that the category manager sometimes checks the visit photos to make sure they comply. I didn't understand why he told me that, since I read the instructions and attached a visit photo exactly as was requested. But I was told at the time that the category officer does check visit photos. I know of one officer who currently does this.

[+elyob]

41 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

At this point in my Waymarking journey, I'll take ANY photo over NO photo on my visited waymarks.

(I've happily given exceptions to someone when they message me with a reason). Things happen. I understand.

 

elyob:

When I first started Waymarking, I visited a benchmark in another state. I received a message from the waymark owner, letting me know that the category manager sometimes checks the visit photos to make sure they comply. I didn't understand why he told me that, since I read the instructions and attached a visit photo exactly as was requested. But I was told at the time that the category officer does check visit photos. I know of one officer who currently does this.

 

Being a benchmarker myself, I understand that.

[+PISA-caching]

Back to the topic:

 

I was wondering, if anybody of you has a good idea how to solve the following problem: When I saw the photo that BK-Hunters made of the display at the dam (which will be a perfect waymark as it is), I thought: Great, but what, if the display would just show the "Generators Running" number? I don't know, if that number changes a lot (maybe they turn generators on and off depending on their demand for electricity or all five generators run all the time and only once in a while one is turned off for maintenance). Anyway, I think that this number alone would be not interesting enough for a waymark. But, is that just my opinion or would you agree? And if you agree, how could I exclude such displays? I would love to let the officers decide, whether a display is interesting enough or not, but I know that this is not what people want. They want a description that clearly explains, what will be accepted or not. So, how do I exclude 'uninteresting' displays with objective criteria? The best criteria that I could think of so far is:

 

Displays that are mainly used by workers, custodians or other similar staff to have control of something and not to inform visitors, tourists, pedestrians etc. will not be accepted.

 

I'm not at all happy with this sentence, but have no better idea so far. Do you?

[+elyob]

I also fail to find the perfect sentence.  We want counters (counting up or down), not displays of off vs on.

[+elyob]

I am liking the category description so far.  Quotations must be in quotation marks...or italics?

[+PISA-caching]

3 hours ago, BK-Hunters said:

I think that's pretty close. Off the top of my head I can't materially improve on it, except grammatically:

Displays that are used primarily by workers, custodians, managers or other staff to monitor operational parameters, with only incidental provision of public information , will not be accepted.

Something like that. 

Keith

 

Not something like that, but exactly that. Perfect. I will include that in the category description.

 

3 hours ago, elyob said:

I am liking the category description so far.  Quotations must be in quotation marks...or italics? 

 

Thanks for the praise and the suggestion. Will include that also.

[+pmaupin]

The description of the category seems to me quite correct, it is clear and precise.

[+Alfouine]

I just have a problem with this sentence "The main focus of the category is on displays that are able to present the development of interesting numerical data"

How to define what is interesting ? it's not really objective.

I think this paragraph could be enough "However, not all counting/measuring displays will be accepted. It will be up to the officers to decide, on a case-by-case basis."

[+Max and 99]

3 hours ago, Alfouine said:

I just have a problem with this sentence "The main focus of the category is on displays that are able to present the development of interesting numerical data"

How to define what is interesting ? it's not really objective.

I think this paragraph could be enough "However, not all counting/measuring displays will be accepted. It will be up to the officers to decide, on a case-by-case basis."

Too subjective.

[+elyob]

I like the idea of the website variable.  Website addresses soon become stale.  Can we suggest including some of the website's content in the description?

[+PISA-caching]

6 hours ago, BK-Hunters said:

One problem encountered by many writers of new categories is that it is essentially impossible to know, or even to anticipate, the nature of every item that will be submitted. As a result, it's nearly impossible to write a comprehensive category description that will cover each and every eventuality. That's simply the nature of the beast. Category writers must either find a way to deal with it, update the category each time such a challenge rears its ugly head, or give up and move on.

 

We'll have to wait for input from Andreas on how he chooses to handle this, if at all, or even if he considers it a problem worth dealing with.

Keith

 

Yes, this is another part of my description that I wasn't really happy with. But fortunately, you had a very good suggestion:

 

10 hours ago, BK-Hunters said:

The main focus of the category is on displays which present the development of interesting numerical data, rather than data with little variation over an extended period. It will be up to the officers to decide, on a case-by-case basis, whether the numbers are sufficiently interesting and/or sufficiently variable for acceptance. 

 

The more I think about it, the more I believe that we can either remove the 2nd sentence completely or replace it with some kind of advice. How about this:

 

The main focus of the category is on displays which present the development of interesting numerical data, rather than data with little variation over an extended period. When posting a new waymark, ask yourself "Is this display interesting enough to tell the world about it?" and if the answer is yes, go ahead.

 

We will not exclude them, but drown them in many interesting, funny, stunning, surprising ... other waymarks.  With the other exclusions we get rid of most of the uninteresting ones anyway. I would rather accept a "boring" display here and there than write a category description that takes a lot of time to read and understand and causes the officers unnecessary troubles when reviewing new waymarks.

Edited August 23, 2019 by PISA-caching

[+PISA-caching]

5 hours ago, elyob said:

I like the idea of the website variable.  Website addresses soon become stale.  Can we suggest including some of the website's content in the description?

 

The website variable is for websites that show (some or all) the numbers (of the diplay), so that everybody can see what the actual numbers are and compare them to the ones visible in the waymark and it's visits.

There is for example a website that shows the debts of Germany at https://www.steuerzahler.de/aktion-position/staatsverschuldung/dieschuldenuhrdeutschlands/. Now you can compare that with the photo in the initial posting. Germany's debts are decreasing now. Congratulations!

Of course people can always include some of the website's content (as long as they follow the rules regarding quotations), but that's not a substitute for what the variable is for. Maybe, I should work on the text regarding the variable to make the purpose of it more clear?

 

Edited to add:

I just searched for the website that Keith mentioned regarding the Libby Dam. I assume he was talking about https://www.nws.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Locks-and-Dams/Libby-Dam/ which not really shows the numbers in realtime, but at least more accurate numbers than in Keith's photo (and future waymark). So maybe I have to change the description of the variable:

 

Website: If you know of a website, that shows all or part of the numbers in realtime or at least updated on a more or less regular basis (e.g. the website of a power station that shows the actual amount of produced energy), you can improve the quality of your waymark by filling this variable.

 

How does that sound?

 

 

Edited August 23, 2019 by PISA-caching

[+elyob]

"Displays, that for example show the number of days since the last accident in a company are not considered being business/sales related and therefore accepted."  Such a counter on a construction site would be excluded because it is temporary?

[+PISA-caching]

No, they wouldn't be excluded. I think the cyclists counters start every day/month/year and are also not excluded.