OPENCACHING NORTH AMERICA

Lets not turn opencaching into waymarking. I see a lotof new virtual listings and that is great (maybe, or maybe it's too many virtuals), except the coordinates and images all appear to be taken from the waymarking site or other online sources. I love waymarking and have posted and visited a few hundred waymarks. But I don't think it will do this site any good to clone a bunch of waymarks as virtual / webcache / logbooks etc. Unless you actually visit them before posting.
That's just my two cents.

Bon Echo wrote:Lets not turn opencaching into waymarking. I see a lotof new virtual listings and that is great (maybe, or maybe it's too many virtuals), except the coordinates and images all appear to be taken from the waymarking site or other online sources. I love waymarking and have posted and visited a few hundred waymarks. But I don't think it will do this site any good to clone a bunch of waymarks as virtual / webcache / logbooks etc. Unless you actually visit them before posting.
That's just my two cents.

That is a fair two cents. I remember our founder, Jerry (he retired after only a year due to health issues. not life threatening or anything), had a policy of you must place a physical cache for every virtual you submit. Or maybe it was even 2 physicals per virtual. DudleyGrunt is our longest tenured admin, hopefully he can give some insight as to when that wording was removed, or if he was involved. As it stands now, virtuals appear to be about 1/3 of our listings, and have not overtaken traditional as the most common type. I also remember for the 2 month long Greater Charlotte Geocaching Club contest in 2014, probably 90% of the new listings we got out of the contest were virtuals.

Hopefully THIS will be a topic that generates some posts to this forum, and good input from users.

I am responsible for a lot of those virtuals and I between my wife and I we have visited all the states and many other countries. I personally have no intention of only doing nor mainly doing virtuals. I am also working on all types including dead drops, MP3 and some BIT caches. I should have spread them out I just got carried away with the series. Just a new guy getting carried away. I will go back to physical caches. I have a bunch of ideas for those as well and there are none near me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hey there Memfis Mafia, as a member here can I say thank-you for your contributions? I've been watching as you roll out cache after cache, many different cache types (even an mp3 cache, that's rare!) and nice page designs too. Impressive and appreciated, you clearly are putting a lot of time and effort into your listings. Makes me wish I lived a lot closer to Colorado.
I guess I'm a bit of a purist and maybe a protectionist about the virtual cache type. To me it a special type reserved for special locations. Well, that's also the impression given on the OpenCaching TOU wiki:
"The purpose of a virtual cache is to highlight a particular location/structure where it is impossible or forbidden to have a physical container. Virtual caches should only be created at a spot of significant importance. Some locations might include a geological feature, monument, historic building or any number of locations. When placing a virtual cache, the “hider” should ask themselves, “Is this somewhere I would want to be brought to?” or “Why would somebody else want to come here?” "
I'm glad you didn't take offense to my comments. BTW they were not completely directed towards your caches - there are other virtuals on this site that I question. Then again, I've done a number of "grandfathered" virtuals on gc.com and probably half of those I felt were not worthy of being a virtual. By my standards. But I'm just one player among many .
Keep up the good work (and maybe consider saving some for August - there may just be a contest )

I do have a question for this topic.

Backstory: I was a Segway tour guide in Cincinnati last year and did my tour starting in Smalle Park, hopped over into Newport via the purple people bridge and into the international gardens.

I had thought, after doing OU084F, putting together a virtual tour based on my old tour route.

Would this not be a good idea?

And I am the entire reason that the Greater Charlotte Geocaching Club had that contest. The intent was to promote OCNA and alternative sites. I was surprised by the number of virtual caches submitted but then maybe I shouldnt have been. While Charlotte is one of the few hot beds for OCNA there are still few find s or hides without some sort of incentive. As a result caches often sit for long periods without find s and then when they are found there may be issues like damages or missing caches. Virtuals offer a way for a CO to have a long lived cache that that requires no maintinence. It was actually a logical choice for the participants to submit. I would suggest that the virtual s submitted werea better option than an actual cache and well worth a visit. I did most of them and know many of the few I did not do and think virtual was the best way to go.

With a limited number of caches and cachers (check the numbers) I welcome them all. While virtuals are not my choice and so long as they do not dominate the options available I will welcome them.

As a Waymarker and virtual geocacher I try to make sure my virtuals can not be googled, or that the logging code can not be found on the Waymarking site.

Most of the virtuals listed on geocaching.com are ownerless, but just clicking on the nearest waymarks feature usually have the answers there required to log the virtual.

I enjoy virtuals that have a strong logging code requirement best. Unless the answer is shared, like with puzzle caches, which is most likely a non-issue here on OCNS.

But, to turn OCNS into Waymarking it would have to not function 70% of the time.

Manville Possum Hunters wrote:As a Waymarker and virtual geocacher I try to make sure my virtuals can not be googled, or that the logging code can not be found on the Waymarking site.

Most of the virtuals listed on geocaching.com are ownerless, but just clicking on the nearest waymarks feature usually have the answers there required to log the virtual.

I enjoy virtuals that have a strong logging code requirement best. Unless the answer is shared, like with puzzle caches, which is most likely a non-issue here on OCNS.

But, to turn OCNS into Waymarking it would have to not function 70% of the time.

Hey MPH!
My view on virtual's is largely due to comments made on the Garmin brOkENCACHE site back when there was a forum and when I was an active member (under the name HamiltonHomeschooler).
So thanks. Glad to see you active here again.

Oh, yeah. I remember you from Garmin's awful site. I still take part in peer review there, why I don't really know. I think the last virtual I reviewed there physical geocaches could not be placed because there was still live ordinace in the area. BOOM!

Virtuals are not really a popular choice, but I did visit one in a National Park about a month ago. We went on a road trip through North Carolina to log our first web cam and visit a Cherokee pictograph called Judaculla Rock, which is listed as an earthcache. Now I'm wondering if Judaculla Rock would make a nice virtual listing for OCNA. It's also listed as a waymark in a few categories.

Just realizing that I haven't replied to this "hot topic". From my POV, I enjoy virtuals. I dabbled in Waymarking a bit at one point and even created a category when there was no place for a lost at sea memorial I came across. I also enjoy locationless caches on TerraCaching and Geocaching Australia. I see Waymarking more like across between Locationless and virtual caching.

Creating a Waymarking category = creating a locationless cache
Posting a specific Waymark = logging a loctionless cache / creating a virtual
Visiting a Waymark = logging a virtual

I've always tried to make my virtuals for special locations. I'm sure many of mine are at places where there could be a physical cache, but usually it is a place that it wouldn't be feasible for ME to have a physical cache since I don't live that close. Though, I do have some virtuals where maybe there could be a physical and I'm not too far away. I've even listed some for locations I've not been. Maybe not optimal all the time, but with a growing site that needs the map grown, I've seen it as something useful. I do try to make them not doable from the couch. Either by requiring a photo and / or asking for information that would be harder to Google, sometimes, even information from a fire hydrant near monument or something as at least part of the Log Password.