Groundspeak Portal

simpjkee:

I've been geocaching for 2 years and 11 months. Been Waymarking for 2 days.

Welcome, simpjkee! I'm glad you've decided to give Waymarking a try.

tozainamboku:

I also noticed that the Waymarking Games department has been replaced by Waymarking Multifarious. I wasn't here for that discussion. I'm a little concerned because Multifarious sound a bit like miscellaneous. It looks like a catchall for categories that don't fit elsewhere. I kinda liked Games, because I could identify this idea of a virtual cache like category as a game to play that lacked some of the seriousness of a category whose purpose was to make a list of things. I suppose it doesn't matter too much, except that it might be an easier sell to some waymarkers if the categories with verification requirements were called games.

This change was a Groundspeak decision for increasing scalability in the future. At this time we are not ready to increase the number of departments. We needed a word that had a broad scope. There will be more on that subject some time in the future.

checkmark:

This change was a Groundspeak decision for increasing scalability in the future. At this time we are not ready to increase the number of departments. We needed a word that had a broad scope. There will be more on that subject some time in the future.

Thanks for the reply checkmark. I sort of figured that it might have been a Groundspeak decision. There have probably been a few categories that didn't really fit anywhere else and instead of creating a new department, it was decided to sacrifice the under utilized Waymarking Games to make a catch-all department where these could be placed.

How this relates to increasing scalability in the future is beyond me. So, in the interest of scalability, I have decided henceforth to refer to Groundspeak's divisions as Geocaching and Groundspeak-Multifarious..

checkmark:

We needed a word that had a broad scope. There will be more on that subject some time in the future.

Well that sounds intriguing. Any hints?

Multi faceted.

The Many faces of Groundspeak maybe.

Sorry I have been out of loop in the forums both here and there.

As times have been hard and just got harder.

But a good saying and advice is this.

You can please some of the people some of the time.
But you can never please all the people all the time.

But also lead by example as was stated earlier and know you are doing the best you can.
For those of us that have been around a while and know things change.

I will check in as I can and hope that we can all work in what ways we can to promote this sport as a Multi Faceted Jewel.

cache_test_dummies:

checkmark:

We needed a word that had a broad scope. There will be more on that subject some time in the future.

Well that sounds intriguing. Any hints?

Not at this time. This isn't the future

Dang. I want it to be the future.

Not only to find out why you need a word that has broad scope, but also I want my own jet pack.

cache_test_dummies:

Dang. I want it to be the future.

Not only to find out why you need a word that has broad scope, but also I want my own jet pack.

Too bad you just missed out was not a jet pack... but was a nice flying hovercraft  that just sold for $27,500NZ.

jet pack, who wants that snails pace transport? i want scotty to beam me from wamark to waymark.....maybe that way i could visit all the places on my list in the same day....

or i could just go in the holoroom, call the place up and take my pic......i could then visit all the waymarks all over the world in a single day

BruceS:

Too bad you just missed out was not a jet pack... but was a nice flying hovercraft  that just sold for $27,500NZ.

Sweet!

chapterhouseinc:

or i could just go in the holoroom, call the place up and take my pic......i could then visit all the waymarks all over the world in a single day

Ack! You're supposed to physically visit the locations! No armchair waymarking allowed!

but some of those holos seemed pretty real sometimes....

didnt pichard have to fight one in an episode?

speaking of which, when will i ever bump into someing to post in startrek?

chapterhouseinc:

but some of those holos seemed pretty real sometimes....

didnt pichard have to fight one in an episode?

speaking of which, when will i ever bump into someing to post in startrek?

Isn't there anything Star Trek related at Universal Studios?

BQ

dont believe so...

i thought the category read--can't be placed because of the tv show/movies......

i know the park in SC had a star trek ride in the early 90s (paramount park or something like that), but is it even still open....

that days of thunder ride looked so awsome with the moving chairs and all.....

ah, the days of watching a Charleston TV station (4 hours to the NE) on rabbit ears when the Atlanta stations (45 mins to the SW) wouldnt come in.....nothing like news and weather that has nothing to do with you.....

I think defending waymarking in an arguement against someone who already doesn't like it is pointless. I think directing constructive comments to those players who are on the fence(or are new) is a good way to go. The best defense for waymarking is "Waymarking is what you make it" the same is true for Geocaching.

I could run around like a madman and add Waymarks or visits to 50 places a day, but I choose to pick some that I'm more interested in, and do my best to present them in a worthwile way. The game will be for me whatever I make it into.

The bit about..."Nobody logs visits" might be true...for now.

I've only been around for a very short time, and I see three basic ways to play this game...

1. Create and manage Categories
2. Choose Categories you like and post NEW waymarks in them.
3. Search for EXISTING Waymarks and log Visits to them.

and then of course, there's the combination of them all.

I see this game as still being young enough that the players who choose the first two options have a lot of work to do. At some point there will be a tip, and new players will arrive and see a whole list of interesting places they have not known about and they can go see them, and then log their visits.
The same is true for another game I have dabbled in "Shutterspot". It is a little daunting when no one ever tries to play abong with the locations I have put a bunch or work into listing, but once that tipping point is reached, then the game will change. I think there will need to be hundreds of thousands of locations listed to get the proper attention for the game.

Ugh, all that and I still missed my point... For people who want to go out and seek something that's already existing, the game seems to be set up backwards (for now). I guess one way to go would be to try coaching those people though the process to see if the "Virtual" location they have in mind is already listed as a Waymark, or can fit an existing Category.

while at a caching event yesterday, the group doing the WIG cache FREAKED OUT when they spotted the benchmark....

hey, a good lead in to Waymarking....

one guy said: 'i posted a web cam and it wasnt approved in 2 weeks so i gave it up'...my response: but there are 949 other categories....you can even post the benchmarks not listed on GC.com [they havent updated the data since the late 90s, and im told they never will]....

at that point i left the group to go get data for the boat ramp, and i found another benchmark there too....

i agree.....why argue with the wall when it has already made up its mind? just move on to the door or window--the provide access to the other side....

hey buddy, its your loss not mine....

Yeesh.  Here we go again.

Unless I'm addressed directly after my one post, I plan to sit this one out.

dinoprophet:

Yeesh.  Here we go again.

Unless I'm addressed directly after my one post, I plan to sit this one out.

I decided to reply. Baloo frequently shoots his mouth off, and it annoys me.

BQ

the blue quasar:

dinoprophet:

Yeesh.  Here we go again.

Unless I'm addressed directly after my one post, I plan to sit this one out.

I decided to reply. Baloo frequently shoots his mouth off, and it annoys me.

BQ

There are some people who would differ on your opinion of Lamé .

Where would Liberace be without Lamé ?

gt.us:

the blue quasar:

dinoprophet:

Yeesh.  Here we go again.

Unless I'm addressed directly after my one post, I plan to sit this one out.

I decided to reply. Baloo frequently shoots his mouth off, and it annoys me.

BQ

There are some people who would differ on your opinion of Lamé .

Where would Liberace be without Lamé ?

I just hate that "big paint brush" mentality. Were my only exposure to geocaching be lamp skirts at Wal*mart then I would think that game is lame too.

BQ

the blue quasar:

I just hate that "big paint brush" mentality. Were my only exposure to geocaching be lamp skirts at Wal*mart then I would think that game is lame too.

BQ

No wait... It gets better! There is a section of power line in California that has a micro on every power pole 1/10th of a mile apart for 40+ miles.

the blue quasar:

I just hate that "big paint brush" mentality. Were my only exposure to geocaching be lamp skirts at Wal*mart then I would think that game is lame too. BQ

Yeah, that bugs me too. There are so many facets to Waymarking - so many different ways to participate and to focus your efforts on precisely the aspects that appeal to you personally. But critics identify one thing they don't like or don't understand, and out comes the big brush and the "L" word.

Several of the most vocal critics continually harp on the lack-of-visits angle, and consistently try to portray Waymarking as a completely failed effort and a lame activity simply because waymarks tend to receive less visit logs than most geocaches receive Found It logs. They equate lack-of-visits with lack of activity, which isn't a fair (or realistic) characterization at all.

I don't understand why the lack-of-visit issue is so important to people when it simply doesn't impact them at all. Why on earth do people who don't waymark care whether waymarks get visited or not? Why is this issue so important that they need to mention it over and over again?

At the end of the day, both Geocaching and Waymarking are geeky activities in which an individual uses a hand-held GPSr to find stuff, and a web-based system for telling about what you've found. How can one of these activities be lame, unless they both are lame?

Sheesh - sometimes it's like listening to someone in the high school Science Club complaining that the high school Math League is lame.

By the way, in high school I was in both the Science Club and the Math League. But not the Chess Club. Nothing personal.

cache_test_dummies:

the blue quasar:

I just hate that "big paint brush" mentality. Were my only exposure to geocaching be lamp skirts at Wal*mart then I would think that game is lame too. BQ

Yeah, that bugs me too. There are so many facets to Waymarking - so many different ways to participate and to focus your efforts on precisely the aspects that appeal to you personally. But critics identify one thing they don't like or don't understand, and out comes the big brush and the "L" word.

Several of the most vocal critics continually harp on the lack-of-visits angle, and consistently try to portray Waymarking as a completely failed effort and a lame activity simply because waymarks tend to receive less visit logs than most geocaches receive Found It logs. They equate lack-of-visits with lack of activity, which isn't a fair (or realistic) characterization at all.

I don't understand why the lack-of-visit issue is so important to people when it simply doesn't impact them at all. Why on earth do people who don't waymark care whether waymarks get visited or not? Why is this issue so important that they need to mention it over and over again?

At the end of the day, both Geocaching and Waymarking are geeky activities in which an individual uses a hand-held GPSr to find stuff, and a web-based system for telling about what you've found. How can one of these activities be lame, unless they both are lame?

Sheesh - sometimes it's like listening to someone in the high school Science Club complaining that the high school Math League is lame.

By the way, in high school I was in both the Science Club and the Math League. But not the Chess Club. Nothing personal.

The complaint does make sense, though, when waymarking is being sold as a replacement for virtuals specifically.  People creating virtuals want lots of visitors.  They see that few people visit waymarks, so it's not good enough.

I understand what you mean, but I'm not saying that it is unfair to criticize Waymarking on the grounds that it is not an exact replacement for Virtual caches. It isn't an exact replacement for virtuals (primarily because you don't get a GC.com smiley for visiting a waymark but also because there are no PQs, and currently there is a lack of integration with the Geocaching site).

But maybe you are on to something. Perhaps when we defend Waymarking by responding to unfair characterizations or patently false statements over in the GC.com forums, the responses are being interpreted by critics as the selling of waymarking as a replacement for virtuals.

I don't see what we are doing as selling Waymarking as a replacement for virtuals. I view what we are doing as being responsive and informative. We are attempting to correct misconceptions and explain the way the site works and how it came about. But I can see how others might view our responses differently.

Still, the use of the word "lame" is just plain insulting to me.

cache_test_dummies:

I understand what you mean, but I'm not saying that it is unfair to criticize Waymarking on the grounds that it is not an exact replacement for Virtual caches. It isn't an exact replacement for virtuals (primarily because you don't get a GC.com smiley for visiting a waymark but also because there are no PQs, and currently there is a lack of integration with the Geocaching site).

But maybe you are on to something. Perhaps when we defend Waymarking by responding to unfair characterizations or patently false statements over in the GC.com forums, the responses are being interpreted by critics as the selling of waymarking as a replacement for virtuals.

I don't see what we are doing as selling Waymarking as a replacement for virtuals. I view what we are doing as being responsive and informative. We are attempting to correct misconceptions and explain the way the site works and how it came about. But I can see how others might view our responses differently.

Still, the use of the word "lame" is just plain insulting to me.

Well, it most often comes up in threads asking for virtuals to return, such as the current one.  Someone points out that this is the replacement, and then the "lame" comments start flying (funny how one of the detractors is the self-styled "Defender of All Things Lame").  I agree it's insulting, which is why I feel compelled to jump in to those threads so often.

I've been considering posting a Waymarking thread in Off-Topic, just to remove the virtual aspect from the discussion.