Groundspeak Portal

Forgive me if this topic has been discussed in the past, but I am interested in someone creating a new category (if it does not already exist) for waymarks that have been placed in multiple categories.  To me this would be a game to encourage placing a waymark in multiple categories.  I've thought of this in two ways:

1.   One BIG category where any waymark with more than one category can be placed. (Not my favorite)

2.   Multiple categories where the qualification for placing a waymark is the number of categories the waymark has been placed.  For instance, "5 Category Waymarks" would be one, "10 Category Waymarks" would be one, "15", and so on. (I think the interest would peak for 5 and above.  The idea of one big category where any mark that has two or more categories doesn't seem that interesting to me.)

In other words, reward a particular waymark for qualifying for multiple categories.  I think this would even be a concept Groundspeak may want to emphasize or feature on the Waymarking home page.  The idea came to me when I noticed the little medals the pop up when you achieve so many waymarks or visits.  I think the icons for such categories should be similar reward type icons.

This would also be a place where you could find all the categories in which a waymark has been included.

Opinionate?

 

Dont we already have something with this with Lucky 7?

That may be, that was one of the things I was wondering.  I just didn't know to look under "Lucky 7".  I'll check that out.

Okay, Lucky 7 is not quite what I was thinking.  I am afraid I will not be able to explain this clearly for everyone to understand, and Lucky 7 is a great example of this.  I don't think you can just skim over the category and get all the facets; you really have to slow down and read.  That being said:

I want to know the feasibility of having reward categories for waymarks that are entered into at least five categories.  In other words if you have a waymark that qualifies for five different categories, you would be able to place your waymarks (collectively) in this one reward category.  But not just five; what about 10 or 15 or 6, 7 8 or 9.  All of these would receive a special trophy icon!

Lucky seven requires 7 categories in different major groupings.  Getting a location in 5 categories is not really that big of deal.  The number of waymarks for the location should be "reward" enough... why inflate things more just for being able to get a certain number in the location. 

So you don't think having one waymark in 5, 10, or 15 different categories is a big deal?  How many would be a big deal?

When last I talked to another Waymarker about this idea, it was approaching 20 at the exact same spot.  I don't think we were still convinced that the community would back it.

 

BQ

Whoa!  You're saying there has been a waymark that has qualified for 20 catagories?  That's incredible!  That's what I'm talking about!

Hi
I think it's quite a fun idea, if it's kept to one 'building' rather than a general location (which I think is what Lucky 7 is about).  I've been visiting some churches recently and they are pretty good multiple cat contenders:
This Old Church
Churchyards
Country Churches
Stained Glass windows
Weather vane
War memorials 1 & 2 ...
Doorways of the world
Gates of distinction
Benchmark
Probably the particular denomination of church
... and maybe more.

I've not found one with all the above yet, but at least half of them.  I wonder how many other sorts of location would have quite so many potential cats applying?  Churches seem to have a lot of cats.  Maybe a park: sculpure, tennis, playground trees, etc.

I suppose the downside is that it might encourage you to submit that 'not very exciting doorway' to try and get above whatever the magic number of cats is to qualify for the 'super medal'.  Cat managers might then feel pressured to ok something that wasn't that great.

Cheers

the blue quasar:

When last I talked to another Waymarker about this idea, it was approaching 20 at the exact same spot.  I don't think we were still convinced that the community would back it.

 

BQ

How do we get the community to back it?  Would you back it?

In the interest of grammar:

How do we get the community to back this category?  Would you back this category?

C4A:

In the interest of grammar:

How do we get the community to back this category?  Would you back this category?

 

I'm saying that I think there were some legitimate concerns about abuse and lack luster entries just to meet the criterion for this.  Not sure that I really need one more Visit on top of a Way-Pile.

BQ

C4A:

In the interest of grammar:

How do we get the community to back this category?  Would you back this category?

As a person that crosslists waymarks in different categories as much or more than most, I really have no interest in this type of category.  I think it can lead to other problems... such as those things listed by BQ and also "stretching" locations just so a waymark can be listed in same location as others.

I see what you're saying.  I just think it would be so cool to have award categories for outstanding waymarks!

I mean what difference would it really make; if you are concerned enough to put one waymark in so many categories anyway, what's one more?

Then, as a waymarker visiting this one waymark in multiple cats,  you would have one central location to know just how many waymark categories you are going to visit by this one location; that would be awesome!

Think of the way you consider if you are going to waymark a location.  To me this concept would and already does add a great dimension to quality waymarks.  Does this location deserve to be waymarked?  Would this location fit into multiple categories?  No.  Well what kind of place can I find that would fit into a couple categories?  Better yet, what waymark can I find that will net me getting into the 10 category club; or the 20 category club?  The more I think about it the better it gets.

I am in no way saying that quality only goes to those locations that have multiple category possibility!  Some of the best may only belong in one place.  This is just another dimension; another way of looking at things.  Not better, just different.

BruceS:

C4A:

In the interest of grammar:

How do we get the community to back this category?  Would you back this category?

As a person that crosslists waymarks in different categories as much or more than most, I really have no interest in this type of category.  I think it can lead to other problems... such as those things listed by BQ and also "stretching" locations just so a waymark can be listed in same location as others.

I think you will agree that it is each groups managers responsibility to screen out waymarks that are submitted to their category that do not apply.  I personally submitted a bridge to several of the bridge categories just because in my ignorance of bridges I did not know to which categories my bridge qualified.  These very responsible group managers weeded me out without hesitation!  And I apprecitiated, by the way, how they handled it. 

I believe we have to place a little faith in the group managers to manage what is best for their category.  In my own groups I have denied waymarks that did not apply.  To me if you submit a mark and it is accepted, then how can it be "stretched" to anything other than what necessary to qualify for that category?

What I meant by "stretched" was listing coordinates that are the same as other waymarks so they are the same even though not actually in same location.... and say "Close enough"

I also don't like the idea of having a category to recognize waymarks that fit into multiple categories.  But, I do like the concept of cross-listing, so that the same interesting item bubbles through the filters of more waymarkers and hits their "places to visit" list in one way or another.  I also like the challenge of seeing how many categories in which a particular item will fit.  Cemeteries with Veteran's Memorials are a common example of where you can score five or more categories at the same coordinates.

I'd rather see this captured on the website through the concept of "stacked" waymarks that Groundspeak has mentioned from time to time.  As I visualize what's been explained in the past (and I may be wrong), a waymark page for a "Cemeteries" waymark might say: 

"This Cemetery waymark is also listed in the following categories:

1. World War II Memorials
2. Static Artillery Pieces
3. Places BQ Got To Before Anyone Else
4. National Register of Historic Places"

With links, of course, to the corresponding waymarks in those categories (or at least to the category page).

Taking the "stacked waymark" concept to the next level, wouldn't it be lovely if we could enter the coordinates, waymark name, country and state, and other "shared" information just once, and then tell the site "I want to list this as a stacked waymark in the following categories" which I then select from a dropdown list.  The programming for this would be challenging, though, since each category has a different design for the input page and different requirements with which to comply.  But even to get us started with a pre-filled form would be nice.  Sharing an image gallery would be nice, too, so that I'm not uploading the same image to five different waymarks.

And taking the concept to an even higher level, perhaps with that stacking code in place, the website could then automatically keep track of the largest stacks of waymarks, and feature these on a special page called "Cross Listing Kings" or "Look at How Busy BruceS has Been."

I also have to go with, "I do not like the idea" of a category for super waymark locations.

That said I didn't like the Lucky 7 idea and was won over by patient efforts of the category creator. Since we already have that one I think this one will be an even harder sell for the peer review though.

the leprechauns:

Taking the "stacked waymark" concept to the next level, wouldn't it be lovely if we could enter the coordinates, waymark name, country and state, and other "shared" information just once, and then tell the site "I want to list this as a stacked waymark in the following categories" which I then select from a dropdown list.  The programming for this would be challenging, though, since each category has a different design for the input page and different requirements with which to comply.  But even to get us started with a pre-filled form would be nice.  Sharing an image gallery would be nice, too, so that I'm not uploading the same image to five different waymarks.

And taking the concept to an even higher level, perhaps with that stacking code in place, the website could then automatically keep track of the largest stacks of waymarks, and feature these on a special page called "Cross Listing Kings" or "Look at How Busy BruceS has Been."

Great Ideas! I would love theis functionality even if it only transfered name, the coordinates and the gallery it would make things much simpler.

the leprechauns:

 I also like the challenge of seeing how many categories in which a particular item will fit. 

And taking the concept to an even higher level, perhaps with that stacking code in place, the website could then automatically keep track of the largest stacks of waymarks, and feature these on a special page called "Cross Listing Kings" or "Look at How Busy BruceS has Been."

Suggestion to Groundspeak:

"Super Stacks!"

For Lep's idea to work we would need to split the first page of the Waymarking Wizard into two separate ones and add a new button.

 

Everything on the current first page could stay except for Variables.  Those vary by Category and would need to stand alone.  There was some talk about making Variables into a new aspect of the Visit system that people could complete them to keep the listing updated as time passes.  This would also give us a great new way to get better feedback as time passes.

We would need a "Clone to Clipboard" button on the new page one to transfer the coordinates, descriptions, country/state to save those to a 'clipboard' for future use but like other software apps it would get cleared when you leave.  Oh, and we would have to have a button to "Paste from Clipboard" too.

 

For images, this could really save Groundspeak too as well as us.  We have a gallery for each account so instead of adding the same pictures to multiple listings you could just link to the images in the gallery.  Then the gallery could show which listing each image was attached to.

 

BQ

OMG, this certainly would be no phun at all!

Lucky 7 has been somewhat popular. We have 69 of them since the first on 10/10/07.  I know that I had a tough row to hoe getting it approved, with a bunch of push back along the way.  It is based on distance and no duplicates in the same departments.  It takes some time and effort to get one to fly.  I did manage to nail one (Georgetown, Part Deux) in about an hour of effort at the location, and right next to another Lucky 7.  It ain't no Neon (sorry, TF), but it is fun doing it.  One of my officers has really gone wild with the category.

You are going at it in a different way.  I know some of my Lucky 7s are based on the same items stuffed into different cats.  If you do go with it, I would suggest that it be the same object.  Defining what an object is might be a challenge. 

And I would set the bar fairly high.  I started my cat with only three.   Seven seemed such a nice number.   Even 7 can be fairly easy to pull off. 

kbarhow

http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WM32W7

kbarhow:

One of my officers has really gone wild with the category.

I think that's a reference to me

Well, I was trying to protect the innocent. 

saopaulo1:

kbarhow:

One of my officers has really gone wild with the category.

I think that's a reference to me

 

You going wild in a Category.... tell me it's not true  

/sarcasm on

I've never seen you Way-Bomb a Category with new submissions

/sarcasm off

LOL.. I can't believe how much you do in Waymarking, you're like a machine!  I run out of funny things to say when I review your stuff LOL.

 

BQ

BruceS:

C4A:

In the interest of grammar:

How do we get the community to back this category?  Would you back this category?

As a person that crosslists waymarks in different categories as much or more than most, I really have no interest in this type of category.  I think it can lead to other problems... such as those things listed by BQ and also "stretching" locations just so a waymark can be listed in same location as others.

I tend to do a lot of cross-posting as well, and the last thing I want to do is add it to one more category!  There is no real fun in that, even though I appreciate your desire to recognize these some way.  And, there are some obstacles.  I review a lot of waymarks, and sometimes I get ones that someone is obviously trying to fit into a category where it really is marginal at best.  This would just tend to increase that problem and that is no fun for the reviewers.

So, this holds no interest for me.  I've got too many "real" waymarks to do!