Groundspeak Portal

I finally got this sent to peer review after a several month hiatus.I kept the category simple and didn't bog it down with a bunch of variations.I kept it short but sweet.We'll see how it goes.

The concept is ok however as written it is way too broad and subjective.  Terms like " strange,unusual and unique places"  are always going to be difficult for the group to review.  Many categories based on these types of criteria have faced difficulties.  Nearly any large item can be seen in google earth in many areas.  I think you need to make it clear that to submit the person needs to take a photo from ground and not just a screen shot from google earth (though that should be required also).

I almost proposed a similar category not too long ago but changed my mind.  Like Bruce, I think it needs some clarification.  Does the oddity have to be identifiable from the ground?  And how odd is odd?  These baseball fields look pretty cool from above, but is that enough (I hope not -- there'd be a lot of those)?

Q10:

Something like this:

 

N 51° 39.048 W 003° 15.384

N 31 25.409  W 024 23.237

 

I would love to follow a category like this, but definately no to the comment about the need of taking a photo from ground level as well. That will kill the category. BUT it would be fun, if someone living in the area (or a tourist) posted a visit from ground level.

There are already sites for simply finding weird stuff in Google Earth, like this.  IMO, if it lacks both GPS use and photography, it's not waymarking.

dinoprophet:

IMO, if it lacks both GPS use and photography, it's not waymarking.

I'm on the fence with this one. I agree that the majority of waymarking should include the GPS and a camera. But how do you explain the Blog and Webcam category? Those were original categories and they seem like an arm-chair waymarker's paradise. Both do not require photos to visit. 

If we follow Groundspeak's original examples then its a great category following in the footsteps of Blogs and Webcams. But if we follow how waymarking has evolved over the years, then you would have to visit the site on the ground in person.

Perhaps this is more suited for a photo goal? I don't know how to handle this one.

Q10:

Something like this:

 

N 51° 39.048 W 003° 15.384

N 31 25.409  W 024 23.237

 

I would love to follow a category like this, but definately no to the comment about the need of taking a photo from ground level as well. That will kill the category. BUT it would be fun, if someone living in the area (or a tourist) posted a visit from ground level.

If it does not require a photo from ground level and coordinates taken from the ground I will vote no.  If all it is a google earth armchair category then I do not want it.  NO ARMCHAIR categories.

I would have the waymarks be included in one of the Google Earth websites like http://www.googleearthcoolplaces.com/. That would kill the subjectiveness a bit.

saopaulo1:

I would have the waymarks be included in one of the Google Earth websites like http://www.googleearthcoolplaces.com/. That would kill the subjectiveness a bit.

It is because of sites like this that I feel that a photo and coordinates from the ground should be required.  Or else someone could sit down in an afternoon and just arm chair waymarks from that site.

In all honesty,i don't expect this category to pass.I guess i wanted to guage some opinions.I know not every waymarker expresses their self in these forums.I never really intended this to be an armchair category.Strictly visitable locations that can be seen via satellites that are unique,unusual and just plain weird.Like a tree grove in the shape of Abe Lincoln or a giant pink bunny on the side of a mountain in france.
I didn't want to bog down the description and posting reqs. so it would be a turn off to post and or visit.
So keep the opinons coming and we'll get her tweaked.

If you really didn't expect the category to pass, a better approach would have been to copy/paste your draft-category here in the forums, and we all could have provided some valuable suggestions before peer review. I think the Zippy and UHaul categories did that and they were able to answer a bunch of questions in the forums before the "bloodbath" of peer review.  This is especially important for categories that push the boundary or are a little outside the box.

You could always cancel the peer vote and tweak it.

dopeyduck:

If you really didn't expect the category to pass, a better approach would have been to copy/paste your draft-category here in the forums, and we all could have provided some valuable suggestions before peer review. I think the Zippy and UHaul categories did that and they were able to answer a bunch of questions in the forums before the "bloodbath" of peer review.  This is especially important for categories that push the boundary or are a little outside the box.

I cannot speak for Zippy, but using the Forums as a proving ground really helped me focus my U-Haul concept in a way that took it from my weird little head and made it into something tangible for most.

BQ

Yes, the forums helped me get many kinks out of the Zippy category before peer review as well.

An added bonus was that people knew and understood what was coming before peer review and were geared up for submissions. We had over 50 submissions in the first week. Without the discussion help I knew it wouldn't fly.

Both U-Haul and Zippy are out of the ordinary categories and as a result they are two of my favorites. Your Google earth category can be another great extra-ordinary cat if you are willing to put the time into it to make it so.

Here is what I think will make it work.

1) Location must be listed on a google earth blog or discussion page/list of some sort. 
2) Location must be permanent in nature. (no reflections or Google errors on maps)
3) Location must be visited for creation and visitable by other waymarkers.
4) Photo or photos of the object on location must be provided.
5) A screen capture of the item in Google must be used for the default photo in the waymark submission.

dopeyduck:

If we follow Groundspeak's original examples then its a great category following in the footsteps of Blogs and Webcams. But if we follow how waymarking has evolved over the years, then you would have to visit the site on the ground in person.

Someone like BeanTeam correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that the original, early categories by Groundspeak were intended to be examples necessarily of what categories should be and how they should work, but were more experimental in nature.  Some were transported from virtual caches, of course, but I think others were sort of beta tests and shouldn't necessarily be seen as precendents or paragons of perfect categories.

Anyway, I think most would agree that this one is way too subjective, and that there needs to be an actual, physical location to photograph, describe, and visit.  Even with that, I'm not too keen on it, as the appearance of something on a satellite image is just too random to be interesting as a waymark. 

Also, keep in mind that most of the satellite images are several years old and things may have changed by the time one goes to create a waymark.   I've often looked at a satellite view to verify a submitted waymark, and found nothing in the image.  It may be a new Walmart or something.  The building I'm living in doesn't show up on Google Earth, and it is several years old.  Looks like a different campus today.  So, that oddity may no longer exist!

Not to veer off topic too much..

The first block of categories were created by Groundspeak staff and some of the existing volunteer reviewers through discussions. The next set was after Waymarking was announced to the public, and the owners of all Locationless caches were given the choice to either close down their listings or migrate the concept over to Waymarking. The third block was done in the original Waymarking Forums by people suggesting ideas and Groundspeak deciding that those were good. The fourth and final version of adding new categories is the one that exists today. At least this is how I remember it.

BQ

Pretty much. There was an interim transition where Groundspeak helped users set up Historical Marker categories for their particular location/area. After this phase the forum proposals seemed to pick up.

In regards to waymarking being and experiment. I think that it is still and experiment. Every category is an experiment to see if it will work. Past success is no guarantee that something similar will work. Of course building off of successful categories as an example will always improve chances of success but if some of the early categories came up for peer review now I can see them not going anywhere today.

Blogs and webcams are good examples of ideas that probably wouldn't get past peer review today since they seem to be more accepting of the virtual visit than actual location based visiting.

Past perfomance not indicitive of future returns.

TheBeanTeam:

Pretty much. There was an interim transition where Groundspeak helped users set up Historical Marker categories for their particular location/area. After this phase the forum proposals seemed to pick up.

In regards to waymarking being and experiment. I think that it is still and experiment. Every category is an experiment to see if it will work. Past success is no guarantee that something similar will work. Of course building off of successful categories as an example will always improve chances of success but if some of the early categories came up for peer review now I can see them not going anywhere today.

Blogs and webcams are good examples of ideas that probably wouldn't get past peer review today since they seem to be more accepting of the virtual visit than actual location based visiting.

Past perfomance not indicitive of future returns.

Good info, but I'd suggest everyone has a different understanding of what makes a "successful" category. I pretty much avoid the McDonald's and Starbucks cats like the plague, but they've got numerous waymarks. I'm guessing more than a few folks prefer to ignore those. So.. although they've got big numbers, they've got a Rodney Dangerfield-thing goin' on ("I tell ya, I don't get no respect"), at least from me.

I started the Entertainment Awards category, and although there's less than a dozen posted, I still view it as a success. Why? A) It's off the ground and running, B) there's been waymarks posted I'm genuinely interested in seeing, and C) there's the potential for more. It'll never compete with the various retail cats as numbers go, but that's fine with me.

Just my two Euros.

ok, this seems to fit here: what about tracklog art? i just hope i can run into one someone else has posted.....

where is that zoom-zoom road anyway....