Groundspeak Portal

In Geocaching, players can add some "ALRs - Additional Logging Requirements" to their cache and without going into personal opinions, they often are enforced at the beginning then fade away over time.

In Waymarking, we already have a section for "Visit Requirements" and these are created by the Category management Group.  Should people that create the specific Waymark Listings also be allowed to add even more AVRs than the Category requires?

Long ago when we were in WM 1.0 and we were still trying to figure out the best ways to blend the move from Locationless/Virtual it kinda made sense but after the Group management platform was added, it seems unnecessary and confusing to add Waymark specific AVRs.

Does allowing individual AVRs enhance or detract from game play?  Personally I see no reason to further complicate visiting, and favour a generic visit concept applied across all categories.

BQ

Until we have the equivalent of Pocket Queries, I'd prefer not allowing AVRs.  I find it hard enough to keep track of the different visit requirements for each category, let alone each waymark.

Once we do have that functionality, on the other hand, I think it would be good for some categories -- it would give them a "virtual cache replacement" feeling.  Not so much for Pizza Huts, though.  (You didn't order pepperoni!  No log for you!)

Except for certain categories in the games area I would say AVR's should not be used.  They do nothing to enhance the game. I would rather go to the direction that there is one standard visit requirement  spanning all categories except for in the games area.  (that standard would not be a gps photo either, a gps in a photo does nothing to enhance the waymark)

I would not advocate AVR's once pocket queries are available... again they do not enhance the game.  Only in the games area do they seem to fit.

I'm against AVRs. It's complicated enough remembering the reqs for each category, why make it harder. Also I beleive that the category officers have more power when it comes to your waymark than you do. I say this because if someone posts a bogus log to a waymark, you only have 1 hour to delete it. After that, the only ones with that power are officers.

I also am anti AVR's. Recently I visited a site where I took photos and enjoyed the visit. It has two waymarks at the location. I was able to log one of the waymarks but not the other. Why? An additional requirement for a GPS or personal photo which is above & beyond the requirement of the category requirements. OK so it really isn't a big deal I am satisfies logging the one waymark but it is a touch frustrating.

I must admit I have come to this viewpoint over time. I tried to encourage AVR's early on, to get the virtual cache feel. As waymarking has grown and evolved I have come to view the issue as BruceS does. I wish for uniform logging requirements across the board except for in the games and possibly a few other categories.