Groundspeak Portal

Maybe when people start into the Bring back Virtuals, we should counter that webcams should move over to waymarking!

That would really stir the pot!

gt.us:

Maybe when people start into the Bring back Virtuals, we should counter that webcams should move over to waymarking! That would really stir the pot!

They are already here.  Only the grandfathered ones remain on the geocaching site.

In fact, I believe there are now more webcams listed on Waymarking.com than there are active webcam caches on geocaching.com.

Which makes it hard for me to understand how seemingly intelligent people can continue to characterize waymarking in such a negative fashion in the GC.com forums. For example, a statement that waymarking "seems to be the dumpster for anything that doesn't work as a cache on Geocaching.com" just doesn't make any sense to me.

How can we possibly defend waymarking against such ignorant and unfair characterizations?

cache_test_dummies:

How can we possibly defend waymarking against such ignorant and unfair characterizations?

Option #1: Change the argument. "You're just jealous that we have nearly 1,000 virtuals, and you don't!"

Option #2: Blow raspberries.  "P-p-p-p-p-t-t-t!

Option #3: Ignore them.

There are certain posters there that always have to same negatives to say, and some are active in all the threads.  I view them as an old record with a scratch on it,  they say the same thing over and over again, become annoying, and ignore them until I can't stand it any more and then try to just toss them aside.

LOL at cldisme.

But my question was rhetorical.

Unfortunately, there are people in the geocaching community who might otherwise give waymarking a chance, but when subjected to the never-ending stream of anti-waymarking rhetoric, will chose not to.

Seems a shame, considering the enjoyment many of us get out of it. I understand how some people might not enjoy waymarking, but I truly don't understand the motivation behind trying to convince other people that waymarking isn't worthwhile.

What is to be gained by pushing an anti-waymarking agenda?

That question isn't rhetorical - I'm really curious what others think about this.

BruceS:

There are certain posters there that always have to same negatives to say, and some are active in all the threads.  I view them as an old record with a scratch on it,  they say the same thing over and over again, become annoying, and ignore them until I can't stand it any more and then try to just toss them aside.

Then you refute them, and they accuse you of the same thing. 

People want virtuals and locationless back (virts I get, but why on earth someone would rather do locationless the old way, I'll never understand), and this site is an impedance to that.  So it gets slammed and slandered, and people are discouraged from coming here because, heaven forbid, they might actually like it, and then virts will never come back and I'll never get my precious icon.  The best is the subjective "the site is hard to use".  Ask for clarification; you won't get it.  Instead, that unaddressable comment is left out there for people to absorb and believe.

cache_test_dummies:

What is to be gained by pushing an anti-waymarking agenda?

I don't really hang out in the geocaching forums but I just had this thought.

There's a limited amount of Groundspeak "resources" (people), and a much larger amount of participant "needs" and "wants" (e.g., with their various websites, apps for handheld devices, and so on). Whatever the process that GS uses to determine the priority of these items, is it possible they are at least partially influenced by comments in the forums? That is, might they say something like "gee, a lot of people don't like waymarking, so we should lower the priority of fixing and enhancing the waymarking site and forums" ?

cldisme:

cache_test_dummies:

How can we possibly defend waymarking against such ignorant and unfair characterizations?

Option #1: Change the argument. "You're just jealous that we have nearly 261,971 (and growing) virtuals, and you don't!"

Option #2: Blow raspberries.  "P-p-p-p-p-t-t-t!

Option #3: Ignore them.

Fixed Option #1

I prefer

"You're just jealous that our nearly 1000 unique icons match what we experience whereas your globally-used 'ghost' represents the death of that activity"

BQ

cldisme:

cache_test_dummies:

How can we possibly defend waymarking against such ignorant and unfair characterizations?

Option #1: Change the argument. "You're just jealous that we have nearly 1,000 virtuals, and you don't!"

Option #2: Blow raspberries.  "P-p-p-p-p-t-t-t!

Option #3: Ignore them.

#4: I bite my thumb at you sir. But i am late for my induction into the knights who say ni.

dinoprophet:

[People want virtuals and locationless back (virts I get, but why on earth someone would rather do locationless the old way, I'll never understand),

I think it is mostly an ignorance thing and when I say ignorance it isn't a slam. I use it in its truest sense and not in a demeaning way. They just haven't learned, or do not understand, the issue either through personal experience or education.

Most who want locationless back never had an opportunity to do one. They don't know the horrible limitations/frustration of only one log per site found or the difficulty locationless cache owners had policing a locationless. They see an icon on someones profile and want one too. I think (in most cases) it is as simple as that.

cache_test_dummies:

Unfortunately, there are people in the geocaching community who might otherwise give waymarking a chance, but when subjected to the never-ending stream of anti-waymarking rhetoric, will chose not to.

You describe one of the four reasons why I started out very strong as a waymarker, but am now "retired" (except for reviewing waymark submissions in categories where I'm an officer).

I do hobbies because they are fun.  If I want drama and controversy, I get paid a large salary to experience that from behind a desk Monday through Friday.

Waymarking started out fun.  The categories and the review process seemed a perfect solution to the drawbacks with locationless and virtual caches.

Since I was having fun, I was motivated to tell others about waymarking because I wanted them to have fun, too.  What I got back was a faceful of negativity, and little to no interest in the waymarks I was creating.

The negativity of others was and is a powerful enough force that it sucks out the amount of fun that I was able to generate from my own power source.  I attribute some of this to my own weakness in choosing to define my own happiness by what other people think, but it is what it is.

The more I hear about the negative impact of drama in forums, the more I appreciate the supportive environment we have here.

gt.us:

The more I hear about the negative impact of drama in forums, the more I appreciate the supportive environment we have here.

Well, we can be pretty harsh on newcomers who want to add categories for every little thing that doesn't move - and a few that do.  They don't last long around here.

cldisme:

gt.us:

The more I hear about the negative impact of drama in forums, the more I appreciate the supportive environment we have here.

Well, we can be pretty harsh on newcomers who want to add categories for every little thing that doesn't move - and a few that do.  They don't last long around here.

There is a difference between giving valuable feedback in a clear and concise mannor, and criticizing the person who suggested the category.

gt.us:

There is a difference between giving valuable feedback in a clear and concise mannor, and criticizing the person who suggested the category.

True, but some people cannot distinguish between the two.  If we say that is a dumb idea (usually, not that bluntly), many people take it that we think they are dumb.

cldisme:

True, but some people cannot distinguish between the two.  If we say that is a dumb idea (usually, not that bluntly), many people take it that we think they are dumb.

So, in addition to putting a little extra thought into our feedback, we should also be modeling the graceful acceptance of well intended feedback.

I know there are times I'm thinking "What a #@$^&% ", while saying "Thank-you for the feedback". I make the assumption that all feedback is given with the best of intentions, and if it wasn't, I won't give the person the satisfaction of getting a rsie out of me.

I have to admit, I enjoy many of the Virtual Geocaches that I've had the opportunity to find/visit.

But after reading through many of the postings in this forum, I've begun to realize that geocaching and waymarking really are two very different games.

No matter what my opinion is, Groundspeak is not going to change a database that is supported by so many different units and has such a huge following. So why not just allow GCer's to play how they want to and WMer's how they want to. It seems to me that because they are both owned by Groundspeak, many people come to Waymarking with a preconceived notion that they are the same game, only played differently. This was my train of thought when I began waymarking. I am beginning to see that there really is a great difference.

Anyway, I guess I just don't see how it will affect WMer's if Virtual geocaches are brought back? Still two different games, right?

But to make myself clear about where I stand - IMO a geocache needs to have a container and a logsheet. Period. Events, Virtuals, Mazes, Earthcaches, Webcams, etc. shouldn't count as a "found" geocache, although I see nothing wrong with them being on a user's profile page (like benchmarks). All of the arguements over these things has started to drive me away from caching. I feel that it is a good, fun game just the way it is, why change it? Change the support, the features, the attributes - but leave the game alone.

I don't deny that waymarking is different than virtuals were and understand why people don't accept it as a substitute.  But I'd like to see a discussion of virts at gc.com where waymarking is never brought up.  Bringing WM into the mix just obscures the real issue with virts.  The discussion becomes "I don't like wm.com, so bring back virts".  The most compelling reasons to not have them have nothing to do with waymarking (armchair logging, reviewer load, subjective quality, landowners choosing to allow them instead of real caches, just to name a few).

As far as defending Waymarking in the GC forums being worth while? I am undecited, as to how to answer that. You need flame proof body armor if you step in the EarthCache forums. I was made aware of Waymarking in the new feedback feature by another user. I am enjoying Waymarking now and find the community MUCH more friendly.